FCC Dupes Another One

On July 20, 2010 the Federal Communications Commission published a consent agreement entered into with Qomo HiteVision, LLC a manufacturer/distributor of products used for presentations. Qomo  Apparently the FCC began an investigation into the radio response products of Qomo because of the absence of Part 15 labelling on the products.  Part 15 of the FCC's regulations requires that almost all intentional and non-intentional radiators meet certain requirements and have appropriate labelling with respect to potential interference by other radiators.  Qomo's products did not have the appropriate labelling. 

As a result of the investigation, the FCC and Qomo entered into an agreement.  Whether the products met other requirements of the FCC is not disclosed in the Order and Consent Decree entered into with Qomo, however, Qomo did agree to pay $12,000 to the FCC.  Even more onerous is the requirement that Qomo adopt a compliance plan, appoint a compliance officer, give employees involved in the development of products training on FCC regulations, and file reports with the FCC on a regular basis with regarding to compliance with this agreement.

As pointed out in other posts on this blog, the FCC cannot issue a fine to a non-licenses without first issuing a formal written Citation.  A search of the FCC's website shows that no formal Citation was issued.  In short, the FCC strong armed Qomo into paying a fine it did not owe, and in to adopted a compliance program that it was not required to have.  To be sure, any manufacturer should be familiar with the FCC's requirements and comply with them.  The point is, however, that the FCC should know its own rules and follow them.  It had no authority to force Qomo to agree to these terms.  In the future, I would hope Qomo would consult with an attorney to protect its rights.