Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why We Need Unlicensed White-Space Broadband Spectrum

Posted by timothy on from the 50,000-watt-internet-stations-at-the-border dept.

pgoldtho writes "PC Mag has a story about why the 'white-space' spectrum that will be freed when TV broadcasts switch to digital should be available for unlicensed use. This would allow it to be used to deliver broadband connectivity in rural areas and create a 'third pipe' alternative to the cable/telco duopoly. The FCC is scheduled to vote on this November 4th. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has filed an emergency appeal to block this vote. If the NAB succeeds, the issue will be kicked into next year. Which would mean a new FCC, Congress, and Administration."

4 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Need clarification by tweak13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unlicensed doesn't just mean a free for all. It would be regulated in much the same way the many existing radio services are. The new users would have to make sure they operate in such a way that the primary user is not affected in any negative way. This includes ceasing transmissions completely if necessary to avoid interference. If you violate it and a primary user complains, eventually you're going to attract attention from the FCC, and they will fine you.

  2. Re:Need clarification by kent_eh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wouldn't there be huge amounts of interference if the spectrum was unlicensed? Could someone not just make a jammer for the frequencies in question and spoil it for everyone? Or do FCC laws cover that even when it's not formally licensed? IANAEE.

    FCC Regulations, Part 15 covers this in great detail.
    Here's an excerpt from sub-section 5

    If a Part 15 transmitter does cause interference to authorized radio communications, even if the transmitter complies with all of the technical standards and equipment authorization requirements in the FCC rules, then its operator will be required to cease operation, at least until the interference problem is corrected.

    Here is a PDF from the FCC entitled "UNDERSTANDING THE FCC REGULATIONS FOR LOW-POWER, NON-LICENSED TRANSMITTERS", which is exactly the rules which would be applicable to the hardware used for accessing the White-Space Broadband Spectrum .

    --

    ---
    "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
  3. This is nonsense. by chaboud · · Score: 3, Informative

    While I love the idea of free and open internet communication (unlikely if we farm this out to Google and Microsoft), if they plan on using the performances they've seen in FCC tests as the benchmark, you can expect even your cable TV to cut out. I absolutely love the concept, but the simple fact is that current versions of these devices don't work, and Kevin Martin is for sale.

    I'd put $50 on him ending up at Google or Microsoft within a year of leaving the FCC. Anyone who talks with the people who were at the white-space device tests knows that these devices failed miserably. If you think the iPhone (or any GSM phone, honestly) next to your speakers is annoying, just wait for these puppies.

  4. Re:Need clarification by Chyeld · · Score: 3, Informative

    Perhaps, they just read your post and realized it was mostly unsubstantiated bullshiting in the fine fashion of Microsoft/Neocon/Fox News FUD.

    Perhaps, they aren't modding you down because they disagree with you but because you didn't add squat to the discussion.