SpaceX Worried Fake Competitors Could Disrupt Its Space Internet Plan

Jason Koebler writes: The biggest impediment to SpaceX's plan to create a worldwide, satellite broadband network might not be the sheer technological difficulty of putting 4,000 satellites into space. Instead, outdated international and domestic regulations on satellite communications could stand in the way, according to a new Federal Communications Commission filing by the company. The company's attorneys wrote that the FCC might make it too easy for competitors to reserve communications bandwidth that they will never use. "Spectrum warehousing can be extremely detrimental and unprepared, highly speculative, or disingenuous applicants must be prevented from pursuing 'paper satellites' (or 'paper constellations'), which can unjustly obstruct and delay qualified applicants from deploying their systems."

Comments

Re:Not a problem

[AikonMGB]

That's why SpaceX is planning to put these satellites into a lower orbit at around 1200 km.

Re:Not a problem

[Anonymous Coward]

With satellite-satellite routing (as they are planning) it can actually be faster than fibre.
Light in fibre goes at around 2/3 the speed of light in free space.

Re:Do it like the homestead act

[Karmashock]

What do you think is a reasonable amount of time to wait for a company or individual to exploit a frequency? A year? Two years?

And then of course there is losing the rights if you don't broadcast there. The warm up and cool down time should be similar.

I think two years of warm up time is the most I would give anyone. If you can't go live within 2 years then I don't want to give you rights to spectrum. I might be willing to make exceptions for really extraordinary projects like Musk's. But what am I offering then? Three years? Four? Four seems right on the edge of excessive even under extraordinary circumstances. If you can't go live in four years then I'm not giving you a lease.

And what is more with stuff like that, if you need four years because you're not going to go live until then... then I see no reason why people can't use that spectrum until then. So when you're project finally goes live they might have to get out of the way. But until then... who cares what they're doing because you're not using it.

  Most of my stipulations refer to terrestrial use however. In rural communities especially they could have broadband internet served rather cheaply using unused radio frequencies. No need to run fiber. Just put up a broadcast tower and there is plenty of spectrum to serve the 500 people in the area with high speed internet.

You could even stretch that radically by using high directional broadcasts.

I saw something from a company called "air fiber" which boasted something like 3 gigabits at 10 miles. I could be getting the numbers wrong. The point is that it was a lot of bandwidth that could be pushed over a long distance without hurting anyone.

The FCC should make a point of getting out of the way of that stuff and not treating every part of the country like it is a major city with locally congested airwaves.

Double Head-Fake

[mbone]

SpaceX is using fake fake competitors to disrupt opposition to its Space Internet Plan. Musk must be a big Animal House fan.

Re:Do it like the homestead act

[Karmashock]

Its sensible. It encourages maximum exploitation. That is the point of regulations like that.

That was the point of the homestead act. They wanted to settle vast stretches of land IMMEDIATELY. That meant offering it basically for free. Anyone that went out there willing to work could within 5 years own a big stretch of land. The big finance interests couldn't just buy it all because they were required to actually develop it. Such interests are rarely capable of actually doing that enmass. They can develop something. But if given a chance they'll try to buy it all and then develop it slowly.

That is one of the problems with the way cellphone spectrum is sold. It shouldn't just be sold to three companies. It should be closer to wifi in that anyone can set it up. HOWEVER, you do require them to interlink their systems, allow rival users to roam on their network, etc. There is more than enough spectrum for everyone.

We don't need 3 companies owning all the spectrum It is absurd. The leases on spectrum should be specific to the region like conventional radio stations. If I lease a bit of spectrum in Florida for a radio station, I don't own that same frequency in California. I don't even own it in all of Florida.

Force the FCC to sell the cellphone spectrum piecemeal. In little 5 or 10 square mile zones. And require that they actually use it to maintain the lease.

What is more, if cell phone coverage in my area is shit, I see no reason why I shouldn't be able to put a cell tower literally at my house that operates as a completely normal cell phone tower. Not only would I get great coverage there but all my neighbors would suddenly get good coverage as well.

Yes require me to get a license and a lease from the FCC etc. that's fine. Just make it something that a person can actually do... legally. The technology will take care of itself.

I've seen some DIY cell tower kits that cost no more than a couple thousand dollars. That's chump change. Link it into a respectable internet connection and you've got a cell tower.