Dec

10

White Space Devices and 21st Century Telecommunications Infrastructure.

sascha's picture

"Smart" wireless devices can use the unassigned frequencies between broadcast TV channels to offer wireless broadband and other innovative services. A rulemaking is pending at the FCC (docket 04-186) to permit unlicensed access to this currently wasted spectrum, subject to technical requirements that will protect television reception from interference. Access to the vacant TV channels in each market has been the subject of intense lobbying, yet far too many of the arguments against "white space" devices rely upon misinformation about the technologies and the FCC process that will prevent harmful interference to DTV reception and other incumbent services.

This policy backgrounder offers a summary analysis, and is an effort to help policymakers strike the appropriate balance between protecting existing services from interference while making the benefits of mobile broadband services available and affordable for all consumers. It provides policymakers with:

  1. a brief historical background to the current FCC proceedings;
  2. a description of White Space Device (WSD) technologies;
  3. a “Myths vs. Facts” section addressing the key concerns raised about WSDs;
  4. an overview of the public benefits of WSDs; and
  5. a concise summary of where we are in the multi-phase process of adopting WSD technologies for consumer use.

For the full document, please click here.

Tags:
»
  1. Shun (not verified) on Wed, 2007-12-12 15:34

    Great info. One thing I am wondering is how will this affect the 700MHz realm. According to Glenn Fleishman a bunch of folks are bidding on this space. Won't that make channels 52-69 a no go area?

    Also, how goes the AWS front? Are the winners of that auction squatting, or do they have plans to roll out devices/services?

    Someone should take a poll on who actually uses over-the-air broadcast. I think a more important figure than "who transmits in this spectrum" is "who is actually relying on this spectrum for their daily television broadcast". There may be a few folk cut off from cable and satellite, but I can't believe that broadcast represents a whole bunch of consumers, even in the rural regions of North America.

    Also, won't this be a non-issue once the DTV transition is complete? The fact that there is opposition at all is telling. It signals that the broadcasters are looking to delay the DTV transition. Why get so bent out of shape about spectrum you're going to be vacating? I smell a wrench in the works, down the line.

    I really like the idea of more unlicensed spectrum. Obviously, we'll have smart people design the smart radios. The airwaves are free. I can't imagine a more "dumb pipe" than a free-floating electromagnetic wave.

  2. sascha on Wed, 2008-01-02 09:27

    AWS and 700MHz are still ongoing processes, but I expect that we'll see an M2Z-esque rollout in the former (hopefully with a free tier and mandated wholesale access) and an open platform requirement on part of the 700MHz C-band. All in all, we're seeing the hard-fought battle to open up the airwaves yield some (baby) steps in the right direction. In terms of squatting vs. rollout, M2Z's CEO told me directly that they have no plans to flip the spectrum and I'm hoping that the FCC will mandate that the winner of the 2155-2175 MHz band license not be allowed to squat the band.

    The NAB says something like 19% of the populace uses over-the-air (OTA) broadcasts. More reliable figures put the high end at about 13% (and even that figure is biased to maximize the number). However one measures it, the percentage has been steadily decreasing for many years.


    3. Post new comment

    The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
    • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

    More information about formatting options