FCC Proposes $1 Million Forfeiture for Marketing Unauthorized Equipment
In what may be a record proposed
fine for failing to test and verify equipment to applicable technical
standards, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed a $1
million forfeiture against Behringer USA, Inc. for marketing unauthorized
digital audio devices.
According to the Commission, the
proposed fine comes in connection with Behringer’s marketing in the United
States of as many as 66 different models of mixers, amplifiers, and digital
effects processors, none of which had been verified for compliance with
applicable requirements. Company records indicate that Behringer imported
approximately 1.17 million unauthorized devices, which were sold through
approximately 2000 retailers over a five year period beginning in January
2000.
In an April 2004 response to a
Commission’s inquiry over the devices, Behringer acknowledged that the
products were subject to FCC Class B equipment verification requirements,
and agreed that it had not verified compliance of any of the 66 models of
digital devices prior to their importation. In its defense, the company
claimed that “a range” of its devices had been tested and passed “CE
directives,” and that it would immediately begin testing all of its products
for compliance with FCC requirements.
However, subsequent
investigation by the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau determined that Behringer
continued to market devices for which it had failed to provide to the
Commission test data reports. In fact, as of the date of the proposed
forfeiture, the company had filed test reports demonstrating compliance with
the Commission’s requirements for only 28 of the 66 models of digital
devices, while continuing to market at least 50 models during the prior 12
month period.
The Commission says that the
amount of its proposed forfeiture was based on $7000 for each of the 50
models that were marketed within the U.S. during the past year, and adjusted
upward based “on the egregious nature of Behringer’s misconduct, its
relative disincentive to comply (ability to pay a forfeiture), and the
substantial economic gain it derived from its continued marketing of
unauthorized devices after the Enforcement Bureau began its investigation.”
