[clug] Openmoko's Neo FreeRunner: Second Australia wide group
ato at meshy.org
Thu Jul 31 02:26:19 GMT 2008
Andrew Smith wrote:
> At risk of sounding like a wet blanket, what about Australian approval?
> The Openmoko wiki only mentions US, Europe and Taiwan.
The ACMA website is rather difficult to understand but there's an
exemption for "cellular mobile phones imported for personal use that
meet the applicable technical standard(s)".
They also specifically mention "ACMA also recognises the following type
approvals: approvals issued by identified foreign administrations
relating to Global System for Mobile (GSM)Communications handsets"
I've also copied below Simon's mail about it from the oz-users list.
Simon Matthews wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 23:36 +0800, Simon Matthews wrote:
>> As overall organiser of the first batch I am happy to put my hand up
>> another batch of 50 phones if there is enough demand and i resolve a
>> legal issue that is worrying me.
> I have resolved the legal issue to my satisfaction. For those that are
> interested in the details they are.
> For the first group purchase i used the following information from
> the booklet
> "Telecommunications Labelling and Compliance Information for suppliers
> of telecommunications equipment and cabling in Australia"
> from www.acma.gov.au
> In the introduction there is the statement
> "Australian manufacturers and importers of telecommunications items, or
> their Australian authorised agents acting on behalf of manufacturers and
> importers (collectively referred to as ‘suppliers' throughout this
> booklet), are required to label each item with either a compliance label
> or non-compliance label. Items not specified by the Labelling Notice
> must not be labelled."
> But there is an exemption
> "cellular mobile phones imported for personal use that meet the
> applicable technical standard(s);"
> For someone importing a single unit for themselves or in our case where
> i am acting on behalf of a number of individuals one would think this
> exemption should apply, but as i was importing sixty phones i started
> wondering if i would be legally seen as a 'supplier' and that the
> exemption wouldn't apply.
> But looking at the actual Telecommunications Act we have
> "413 Supply of unlabelled customer equipment or unlabelled
> customer cabling
> (1) If a person:
> (a) is a manufacturer or importer of customer equipment or
> customer cabling; and
> (b) is required under section 407 to apply to it a label in
> particular form;
> the person must not supply the equipment or cabling unless a
> in that form has been applied to the equipment or cabling.
> (2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an
> punishable on conviction by a fine not exceeding 100 penalty
> (2A) Subsection (2) does not apply if the person has a reasonable
> Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to
> the matter
> in subsection (2A) (see subsection 13.3(3) of the
> Criminal Code).
> (3) In this section:
> supply includes supply (including re-supply) by way of sale,
> exchange, lease, hire or hire-purchase."
> I am confident that the definition of supply lets me off the hook here.
> Section 2A is also comforting.
> If anyone has any further thoughts about this i would like to know.
More information about the linux