At 01:10 PM 8/15/2008, David Forbes wrote:

Indeed... I believe that this is also an area where whether something
is a kit or a "component destined for inclusion in other equipment"
makes a difference.

A significant fraction of the expense of getting regulatory approval
(for a US RTL, for FCC, for CE, etc.) is actually doing the necessary
research and analysis to determine just which standards are
applicable, whether they need testing, etc.  You can burn up $10K of
labor pretty quickly in just writing up the appropriate declarations
that "no, our product is exempt because x, and y, and z, in section a
of regulation b, says so"

Heck, just getting copies of the relevant standards could put a
pretty big dent in $10K.

As others have pointed out, this is particularly painful if you're a
small quantity vendor of inexpensive widgets, since the paperwork
handling cost is pretty much independent of the cost of the item
being approved/certified/sanctified/exorcised/whathaveyou..

On the other hand, if you're actually PAYing for the engineering
time, it might not be a huge fraction of the design and analysis
time, except for trivial modifications to existing products that
trigger recertification.

Jim Lux

It all depends how you intend to sell products in the EU without "placing
your product on the market".

I am not sure how you can do it "legitimately" and hope to rake in
significant sales. You do not need a local distributor to be "placing your
product on the market." Advertising is sufficient, catering to the market
(by providing sales brochure in local language) is sufficient, a price list
in local currency is sufficient.

On the other hand, if someone logs on your english-language, US based web
site and buys directly in US$ (you sell FOB US) and you don't advertise
shipping costs to the foreign country and there is only US-english
documentation and the buyer takes care of the importing paperwork, I don't
see how you could be accused of "placing your product on the market."

If you add the proper disclaimers regarding the fact that your product is
not CE compliant and the buyer accepts all liability as a result, I don't
see how you could be in trouble.

Tokyo Hi-Power (a Japanese ham-radio equipment manufacturer) has done that
for a long time. For a while their products were not FCC certified and they
did not have a local (US) distributor, yet they would sell to US customers.
You had to either call Japan or email to the sales office in Japan and they
would give you a price in Yens. They would also ship to you directly if you
asked, but none of that was advertised on their web site. This is a little
different, since FCC regulations are different from CE regulations, but the
spirit is the same.

Disclaimer: IANAL, this is just my opinion...

Didier KO4BB

Didier Juges wrote:

I've asked about US made equipment sold through UK Amateur Radio
suppliers, equipment made by companies like Tigertronics and RigBlaster
for example, and I'm told that they don't have CE marks.  I'm also told
that there is at least one UK manufacturer selling add on equipment
(mainly audio interfaces) that doesn't put a CE mark on their equipment
which they advertise and sell in the UK to European buyers.

I wonder how the UK shops/dealers and this, admittedly small,
manufacturer, get round the CE mark regulations?  I wonder if they are
just taking the chance that nothing will go wrong and no one will have
the evidence to take them to court or have the resources to prove their
gear is non-compliant?  If so, and presumably this is a concious
decision by the dealers/small manufacturers, why don't many other non-EU
and small scale manufacturers and sellers just do the same thing I wonder?

Dave

In message 48AA6DEE.10908@tiscali.co.uk, David Ackrill writes:

They are.

As long as nothing goes wrong, they fine, if something goes wrong,
they're royally screwed.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp      | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG        | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer      | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

In message 001701c901d4$6ae978b0$0300a8c0@pc52, "Tom Van Baak" writes:

Just hardware.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp      | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG        | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer      | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

The foreign manufacturers probably figure that the most they have to loose
is the business they do in CE countries, which they would not have anyhow
otherwise because they can't or won't afford the cost of compliance design
or testing.

They may be correct as long as their equipment is unlikely to be implicated
in a loss of life situation and they are a small company, not worth suing
through international tribunals.

The situation for the dealer/reseller/distributor is different. They are
based in the CE country and they have everything to loose, and I am
surprised they would actually do it.

Didier KO4BB

It can be. Consider for instance the software in WLAN-cards, which can
allow non-compliant channels for instance. There is no real
software/hardware boundary, it is the equipment in its fully functional
order that is approved. Infact, runninng a completely different system
software that has significantly different behaviour could potentially void
the CE mark. Reasnoble changes in software does not void the CE mark.

So, you can't get away with "it's only the hardware".

Cheers,
Magnus

Wrong. See my other notice.

Cheers,
Magnus

Quoting Poul-Henning Kamp phk@phk.freebsd.dk, on Tue 19 Aug 2008
12:02:54 AM PDT:

This is not necessarily a bad strategy.  You'll note that things like
defibrillators are not made by big companies with lots of assets
(since a defib is one of those things being used on a dying person,
and success is not guaranteed, and the family members of one of those
non-successes sometimes want someone to sue)

You could have a mfr company with small assets that's willing to take
the hit and go out of business.

The principals could then reform the company under a different name, etc.

"piercing the corporate veil" only goes so far.

Jim