Liridice I completely agree with your perspective. I had previously underestimated the complexity of the issue, and your concerns are particularly important. They have highlighted risks and boundary issues that I hadn't considered before. I now realize that even choosing a frequency for "advice" carries responsibility – it could create compliance risks. Even if we were using the 409MHz public band, we couldn't guarantee that the equipment on-site would be properly certified and within power limits. In the end, if something went wrong, it could actually put me in a difficult position. Furthermore, if I were to get involved with adding new locations or troubleshooting issues during use, I would not only be overstepping my boundaries, but also taking on responsibility that should belong to the vendor. They are providing a service for which they are paid, and ensuring compliance and proper operation is their obligation. It's not our place to take on those responsibilities for them.
"If there's evidence and the warning is ineffective, contact law enforcement." As a HAM (amateur radio operator), maintaining the boundary of "reporting according to the law without overstepping" is the most reliable approach. This allows us to avoid taking on additional responsibilities while also ensuring compliance with regulations and protecting the electromagnetic environment through proper channels. Thank you for the reminder; otherwise, I might have made a mistake. 73
闽ICP备2021006864号-7
闽公网安备35020602002794号