FCC Wants Proposals To Manage White Space Database

kdawson writes "A year after voting unanimously to open 'white space' frequencies for unlicensed use, the FCC has now issued a public notice seeking database proposals (PDF). Howard Feld explains in his blog posting: 'At last! We can get moving on this again, and hopefully move forward on the most promising "disruptive" technology currently in the hopper. And move we are, in a very peculiar fashion. Rather than resolve the outstanding questions about how the database provider will collect money, operate the database, or whether the database will be exclusive or non-exclusive, the Public Notice asks would-be database managers to submit proposals that would cover these issues. ... I label this approach "good, but weird."'"

Comments

uh oh

[Anonymous Coward]

This thing might get a bit political, with some not very nice things being said about whoever wins it. Some problems may be experienced with the day-to-day operation, too. Perhaps another story in Slashdot about some of that down the road.

Would be nice if they had included a schema

[superid]

I've read the proposal twice. They don't describe what they want to store at all. And I don't see a reference to another document either. How can anyone make an informed proposal without knowing anything about the data!!

Re:Summary doesn't make sense

[Joreallean]

Quoted from the proposal: "Although there appears to be general agreement on the basic functional architecture for TV band database(s) (i.e., a data repository, a data registration process, and a query process), there are a variety of views on whether we should designate one data repository administrator and allow multiple registration and query service providers, have each administrator perform all functions, or some other combination." They obviously don't know how to do it, no matter how clear the answer is in front of them. I don't think its a bad thing to ask for solutions from the private sector. They don't want to manage it, but they also don't know the best person to manage it either.

Legalize it. Then tax it.

[hey!]

I dunno.

How hard is maintaining a database? Especially one that doesn't get updated that often? I'd guess the trick would be distributing the right information to the right devices.

It seems to me that this is *exactly* the kind of thing that should be run by government bureaucrats. It could be designed and operated by a private organization like BB&N, but I certainly don't want to see for-profit companies that might have agendas *other* than accuracy. Crafting creative public policy is not something you want a for-profit entity to do, either directly or through front groups.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see any economic mystery here. They're just creating a new, flexible class of license which allows manufacturers to sell, and consumers to buy and operate, devices that adjust to the local allocation of spectrum. Invest the money in the system so it gets done fairly, then tax the devices enough so the database becomes self-supporting.

Re:i want UHF CB Radio!

[FudRucker]

it is a feature if DX/Skip is what you want to use, if you want to talk locally but can not because of the DX/Skip noise is too high then it is a bug, (all a matter of perspective)