FCC Allows Mix-and-Match Wi-Fi Antennas

Glenn Fleishman writes "We just filed a story at Wi-Fi Networking News about how the FCC recently and quietly approved rules that will allow the legal use of the Pringles can and other antennas. Currently, it's clearly illegal--even though it's incredibly easy--to swap out a manufacturers' antennas from a Wi-Fi access point with an antenna of your choosing. It's legal to sell antennas; not legal to deploy them. Call it the switchblade kit rule: legal to sell, but don't assemble. The FCC's new rule provides a middle ground: a manufacturer can certify their hardware with the highest gain legal antennas of each type (yagi, omni, etc.) and then end-users can swap in antennas of equal or lesser signal characteristics. It's an important move because it removes the potential for community wireless and individual users to be prosecuted for illegal antennas once new certifications are in place."

Comments

illegal antennas are still illegal

[poot_rootbeer]

it removes the potential for community wireless and individual users to be prosecuted for illegal antennas once new certifications are in place

No it doesn't. How'd you come to that conclusion?

If a user has an antenna that exceeds the specs that have been certified for that antenna type with that device, it's still illegal to use and the user can still be prosecuted.

And if the manufacturers don't get their devices certified with anything other than their weak default antenna, you still won't be legally allowed to use anything stronger than their default. This will vary by manufacturer -- Linksys might want to sell powerful upgrade antennas to its users, so it will get its equipment certified with a really powerful antenna. Apple, on the other hand, probably has no plans to sell replacement antennas for its Airport devices and will only get certification for its standard antenna.

Re:illegal antennas are still illegal

[eggboard]

I think you make my point, though: it's better to be in compliance than out of it. If Linksys recertifies its gear with high-gain antennas, then it will be MUCH easier for community networks and others to use perfectly legal antennas instead of what are clearly illegal ones.

It just makes it easier to be legit and thus avoid the potential for prosecution.

Re:A minor note

[maximilln]

Tony Chong, of Cheech'n'Chong, ran a glassblowing shop which made artwork glass tubes. The shop was taken down by the DEA and Chong was charged in court. I didn't keep track of the outcome.

At the end of the day legality is determined by how badly they want to get you.

Re:Clearly Illegal?

[javaxman]

Yup, it's illegal.

A part 13 device can only put out a limited amount of signal. This is why there aren't "ultra-powerful' wifi basestations that can cover super-large distances.

Sure, you can buy or rig any antenna you want, but you're violating part 13, and if someone was catching interference from you and could track you down, they could ( in theory ) take you to court to make you stop flooding the spectrum and overpowering their own part 13 devices. And you could face FCC fines, I guess.

In fact, now that I've read TFA, this ruling doesn't help uncertified antennas at all. In fact, you can expect certified antennas to be more expensive and of more limited types, as uncertified ones are basically now for lawbreakers only, unless maybe they're spec'd to be at *lower* gain than certified ones ( kinda hard to tell from the article, it may be that you're actually only safe with certified antennas ). We'll probably see less variety in antennas now, actually.