Samsung PN59D8000 Issues: interference complaint from neighbor - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 161 Old 04-07-2012, 01:28 PM
Senior Member
 
kaosv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 225
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
We all know Tony Starks first 37 hearts failed from plasma . He actually had 37hearts before finding out it was his neighbors TV and he went on to become Iron man.

I just cannot find out what make TV pretty sure it was a Samsung. I only know one government official though. He works DEA .....they use stark enterprise guns for raids.
kaosv1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 161 Old 04-07-2012, 04:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
David_B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: delete me
Posts: 984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Devices that meet the FCC part 15 can interfere still and be completely legal.

See the link to the eham site.

It doesn't matter how many people from the government say they will show up in court with the OP, if the TV does meet part 15 he could lose. Unless the FCC is not using Part 15 against him, instead some newer "non-interference with emergency communication" laws that don't pertain to part 15.

In that case, he would be better off having samsung on his side instead of against him. Because if the government starts stopping people from using devices that meet part 15, no manufacturer or consumer would be safe from "big brother".

Government abuse of power is not stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post

Yeah no kidding. Its about stupid. The set is obviously causing the problem, 100% certian. Not that difficult of a troubleshoot when it causes the same problem each time it is plugged in and turned on in each location along with trying a completely different power source from the neighbor himself.

WOW what is hard to grasp??????


buytme
David_B is offline  
post #153 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 04:29 AM
Senior Member
 
kaosv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 225
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Devices that meet the FCC part 15 can interfere still and be completely legal.

See the link to the eham site.

It doesn't matter how many people from the government say they will show up in court with the OP, if the TV does meet part 15 he could lose. Unless the FCC is not using Part 15 against him, instead some newer "non-interference with emergency communication" laws that don't pertain to part 15.

In that case, he would be better off having samsung on his side instead of against him. Because if the government starts stopping people from using devices that meet part 15, no manufacturer or consumer would be safe from "big brother".

Government abuse of power is not stupid.

Samsung will NOT show its face......why would they commit resources to one TV. This is all mute.
kaosv1 is offline  
post #154 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 06:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
David_B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: delete me
Posts: 984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 26
So you think Samsung is just going to refund millions of people the money for thier TVs that meet part 15 but the government wants to then deem "illegal"?

It's not one TV, it's every tv they have ever made, every radio, every device that puts out RF. Yeah, I do think they would show up if this where the case.

And it's moot, not mute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaosv1 View Post

Samsung will NOT show its face......why would they commit resources to one TV. This is all mute.


buytme
David_B is offline  
post #155 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 07:41 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 23,030
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 430
more posts deleted
markrubin is offline  
post #156 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 6,961
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Liked: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

So you think Samsung is just going to refund millions of people the money for thier TVs that meet part 15 but the government wants to then deem "illegal"?

It's not one TV, it's every tv they have ever made, every radio, every device that puts out RF. Yeah, I do think they would show up if this where the case.

And it's moot, not mute.

And that would be were, not where.

Samsung unlikely will show up in small claims court would be my guess, not a lawyer but I do not believe a small claims court would have any significant impact in regards to their liability for their overall FCC compliance. Bring a class action lawsuit in the proper court, maybe.

lovinthehd is offline  
post #157 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiovideoholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Murray KY
Posts: 2,596
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Devices that meet the FCC part 15 can interfere still and be completely legal.

See the link to the eham site.

It doesn't matter how many people from the government say they will show up in court with the OP, if the TV does meet part 15 he could lose. Unless the FCC is not using Part 15 against him, instead some newer "non-interference with emergency communication" laws that don't pertain to part 15.

In that case, he would be better off having samsung on his side instead of against him. Because if the government starts stopping people from using devices that meet part 15, no manufacturer or consumer would be safe from "big brother".

Government abuse of power is not stupid.

My point is that the set is causing the problem and its most likley an internal problem, I wasnt the one saying its all the sets. Samsung hasnt even inspected the set to see if something happened when it was being built. My set isnt causing any problems with the two radios near me and I doubt many if any others are doing what this set is doing. Just saying its really obvious something isnt right.

And as far as people showing up in court for the OP, its only small claims court which should cost the OP around $50 total. I seriously doubt anyone from samsung will be attending small claims court over a $3000 TV! Thats why I told the OP to read one of my previous posts about the proccess and how he will still have to get the money from them if he wins as it will only be determined by court that samsung owes him money. It wont be the courts place to make sure they pay him.
audiovideoholic is offline  
post #158 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 12:35 PM
Member
 
OIFVET's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Surprised to see this thread still shows signs of life. Lot of deleted posts though. I wonder if the neighbor who started this whole issue is giving the same energy towards conflict resolution as the author of this thread. My guess is no he's not.
OIFVET is offline  
post #159 of 161 Old 04-08-2012, 06:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
AvidHiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Right, because we all know how fast the legal system works.

I expect it will be some time before there is a resolution, but rest assured it will involve an absolute minimum expenditure of time and money for all parties involved. My bet: there will be no class action suit, and no "investigation" of Samsung. Reality check, people. Doesn't matter what you know, or think you know, this will be brushed under the carpet (hopefully to the benefit of the OP).
AvidHiker is offline  
post #160 of 161 Old 06-08-2012, 12:11 PM
Member
 
JHummrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I've had the 59D8000 for a few months now. In the last month or so I've started to hear a CONSTANT creek/settling type noise from the TV after it's turned on and after it's turned off for about an hour. It's like the same type of sound a house would make if it were settling but it's constantly happening. Anyone else have this issue? Is this an indication that my screen is going to peel? I'm going to call Samsung but I wanted to put some feelers out first. It almost sounds like the plastic is expanding and cracking/popping. It's about every minute or so I hear a "click/pop" noise.
JHummrich is offline  
post #161 of 161 Old 06-08-2012, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 6,961
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Liked: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHummrich View Post

I've had the 59D8000 for a few months now. In the last month or so I've started to hear a CONSTANT creek/settling type noise from the TV after it's turned on and after it's turned off for about an hour. It's like the same type of sound a house would make if it were settling but it's constantly happening. Anyone else have this issue? Is this an indication that my screen is going to peel? I'm going to call Samsung but I wanted to put some feelers out first. It almost sounds like the plastic is expanding and cracking/popping. It's about every minute or so I hear a "click/pop" noise.

Why did you choose this particular thread to go off in another direction with? Try the PNxxD8000 thread, assuming your set is a plasma, would be more appropriate.

Was kinda hoping when this popped up again that the OP had added some more to the story....

lovinthehd is offline  
Reply Plasma Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off