FCC: Only We Can Regulate Unlicensed Spectrum

rfc1394 writes "In an article in ComputerWeekly, it was announced that the FCC has ruled that it has final jurisdiction over unlicensed wireless space, meaning that an airport authority can't force airlines to (pay to) use its wireless network and they may set up and use their own. This bodes well for the development of wireless networks in various areas as it means that you have the right to set up your own network even if your landlord would want you to use theirs."

Comments

A Most Excellent decision

[HotNeedleOfInquiry]

I remember being outraged at the petty officialdom thinking that they somehow had exclusive control of the radiowaves around their airport. This is indeed a *Good Thing* and should serve as a reminder to other local fifedoms.

Re:A Most Excellent decision

[LostCluster]

That's where the "allowed to physically possess" part comes in. Your employer can ban all such devices from the premises on the grounds of security. However, they can't tell Verizon, Cingular, T-Mobile, and company not to paint their workplace with signal, and they can't put up jamming devices to block signals either.

I do appreciate your optimism...

[PinchDuck]

but your landlord can just put the "must use the landlord's wireless network" clause in your lease. You sign away many, many rights when you sign a lease already, this would just be one more.

What doesn't the FCC have jurisdiction over?

[bobhagopian]

The article says "the FCC has ruled that it has final jurisdiction over unlicensed wireless space"

I think the ruling is a good one, but something about the previous sentence bothers me: I don't like the idea that the FCC can decide what it does and does not control. Does anyone see the potential for abuse? *puts on tinfoil hat*

Re:What doesn't the FCC have jurisdiction over?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

I think the ruling is a good one, but something about the previous sentence bothers me: I don't like the idea that the FCC can decide what it does and does not control.

If you don't like it, take 'em to court. The courts CAN tell 'em they're full of hogwash.

But in this case the courts would almost certainly rule that they are right - that congress DID give them that exclusive regulatory authority, and that the supremacy clause extends that authority over the states and their subdivisions.

It's the public's.

[twitter]

The public owns the airwave, and the FCC just happens to embody the public interest right now. They can be done away with by a vote. In this case, I'm glad they stepped up to the plate and squashed the takeover attempt.

I'm going to go dance in the street.

Re:Colleges

[Yebyen]

That is correct. This means that colleges cannot prevent students from setting up their own wireless networks. It doesn't have anything to say about whether students are allowed to connect said wireless network to the college network. Most colleges (any that care whether you set up a wireless network) should have something in their AUP which outlines what you are and are not allowed to plug into their network jacks. If they say "You can only plug individual computers into our network," and you plug in a wireless router, they have every right to suspend your network access privileges.

Big government

[svenvder]

Now thats all fine and good but am i the only one paranoid about the government acquiring more power. I say the government should have three jobs: 1) common defense 2) build roads 3) deliver the mail Thats it no more

citywide networks

[Darth Cider]

I'm also glad for this FCC ruling. After reading about the citywide network in Rio Rancho, NM, which has rather hefty subscriber fees ($50/mo for 1 Mb/s), I wondered if authorities were seeking monopolization of WiFi.

This statement from the FAQs could indicate that: It's important to have the involvement of city government in approving this type of deployment

Why? Maybe if the service were free and tax supported, not subscription based. All they really provide is WiMax routers on lamp poles and the 43 Mb/s backhaul. (You supply your own WiFi card/router.) The disruptive technology that Cringely extolled recently, regarding Linksys/Sveasoft DIY mesh networks, is much preferable.

What Rio Rancho gets out of the deal is subsidized bandwidth for emergency services, which taxes ought to cover. Now government officials have an interest in suppressing DIY mesh networks. And Rio Rancho is being held up as a model for other communities.

The FCC ruling is very much in the spirit of Open Source.