Alternative DMMs to Fluke?
in [Design]
|
Prev: 555 monostable circuit design
Next: current source
From: Jim Yanik on 12 Apr 2006 12:15 Smitty Two <prestwhich(a)earthlink.net> wrote in news:prestwhich- 63BE2B.20295011042006(a)news.west.cox.net: > In article <MPG.1ea5b4dbda2d0fa29899a4(a)News.Individual.NET>, > Keith Williams <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >> >> >> No contradiction at all. In the US it is illegal to put a "Made in >> &country." sticker on a device that's only &country. content is the >> insertion of a battery. I can't imagine this being kosher in the >> EU. It has nothing to do with re-branding. >> > > > Actually, it seems to me that your logic is flawed, your position is > nebulous, and your analogies irrelevant. > > But just clarify this one issue for me, and then I'll let it drop. > Suppose I buy a chassis made in Japan, some electronic components made > in China, a blank PWB fabricated in Maylasia, a battery made in Mexico, > and a can of spray paint made on the moon. And I put it all together > into a product. Now, can I say it was made in America? > > And if so, where and when do I cross the line to illegality? You say > that if all I do is add the battery, I can't claim I made it here. What > if all I do is add the battery and spray paint it? What if all I do is > add the battery, install the assembled board into the chassis, and paint > it? What if all I do is add two components to the PWB, install the > board, paint it, and add the battery? > > And how is this different than re-branding? One company can take another > company's product and stick their name on it, but one country can't do > that with another country's product? > > Your standards are indefensible, because they're undefinable. > I'd say that at least 51% of the content(labor and parts) must come from the country of "manufacture". How is it set for the auto industry? -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net
From: Jim Yanik on 12 Apr 2006 12:17 Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in news:04io32dflfp2ocju3ci780mi8mdkvhuq2r(a)4ax.com: > On 11 Apr 2006 23:09:21 GMT, the renowned Jim Yanik <jyanik(a)abuse.gov> > wrote: > >>"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam(a)yahoo.com> wrote in >>news:123nrkh83u257fe(a)corp.supernews.com: >> >>> "Jim Yanik" <jyanik(a)abuse.gov> wrote in message >>> news:Xns97A1EE39B95EBjyanikkuanet(a)129.250.170.83... >>>> Now you can't even get a component-level schematic for your TEK TDS >>>> scope;they don't want you trying to fix them yourself,even "obsolete" >>>> ones they no longer service. >>> >>> Parts of Tek (not all of it -- there are still plenty of good people >>> there) seem to now have the slightly paranoid "big company" attitude >> >>You want a good read,hunt down a copy of "Winning with Tek;The First 40 >>years at Tektronix" by Marshall M. Lee. >>The story of Tek from the beginning. > > Make that "Winning with People: The First 40 Years of Tektronix" > > How embarassing;I had the book right at hand,too! Thanks for the correction. ;-) -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net
From: Michael A. Terrell on 12 Apr 2006 13:27 Jim Yanik wrote: > > > I'd say that at least 51% of the content(labor and parts) must come from > the country of "manufacture". > > How is it set for the auto industry? Do you remember seeing stickers on modules and chassis in consumer electronics stating "xx% of this assembly built with foreign parts" back in the late '60s and early '70s" -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Keith on 12 Apr 2006 14:07 In article <Xns97A37D51EC7F5jyanikkuanet(a)129.250.170.85>, jyanik(a)abuse.gov says... > Smitty Two <prestwhich(a)earthlink.net> wrote in news:prestwhich- > 63BE2B.20295011042006(a)news.west.cox.net: > > > In article <MPG.1ea5b4dbda2d0fa29899a4(a)News.Individual.NET>, > > Keith Williams <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> No contradiction at all. In the US it is illegal to put a "Made in > >> &country." sticker on a device that's only &country. content is the > >> insertion of a battery. I can't imagine this being kosher in the > >> EU. It has nothing to do with re-branding. > >> > > > > > > Actually, it seems to me that your logic is flawed, your position is > > nebulous, and your analogies irrelevant. > > > > But just clarify this one issue for me, and then I'll let it drop. > > Suppose I buy a chassis made in Japan, some electronic components made > > in China, a blank PWB fabricated in Maylasia, a battery made in Mexico, > > and a can of spray paint made on the moon. And I put it all together > > into a product. Now, can I say it was made in America? > > > > And if so, where and when do I cross the line to illegality? You say > > that if all I do is add the battery, I can't claim I made it here. What > > if all I do is add the battery and spray paint it? What if all I do is > > add the battery, install the assembled board into the chassis, and paint > > it? What if all I do is add two components to the PWB, install the > > board, paint it, and add the battery? > > > > And how is this different than re-branding? One company can take another > > company's product and stick their name on it, but one country can't do > > that with another country's product? > > > > Your standards are indefensible, because they're undefinable. > > > > I'd say that at least 51% of the content(labor and parts) must come from > the country of "manufacture". http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/madeusa.htm > How is it set for the auto industry? From above: "American Automobile Labeling Act ? Requires that each automobile manufactured on or after October 1, 1994, for sale in the U.S. bear a label disclosing where the car was assembled, the percentage of equipment that originated in the U.S. and Canada, and the country of origin of the engine and transmission. Any representation that a car marketer makes that is required by the AALA is exempt from the Commission?s policy. When a company makes claims in advertising or promotional materials that go beyond the AALA requirements, it will be held to the Commission?s standard." -- Keith
From: Zak on 12 Apr 2006 14:31
Jim Yanik wrote: > I'd say that at least 51% of the content(labor and parts) must come from > the country of "manufacture". I remember something with 'value'. So if the label goes on somewhere and it is from china, they can claim it is made where the sticker went on: the brand may be most of the value then, right? Thomas |