approve:sigmanu Two Good Spectrum Proceedings Die Quietly

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: dewayne () warpspeed com (Dewayne Hendricks)
Date: May 8, 2007 9:57:06 AM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <xyzzy () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Two Good Spectrum Proceedings Die Quietly

[Note:  I take exception to Harold's rendition of history.  Actually,  
the groundwork for these initiatives started back under the Clinton  
Administration, when Bill Kennard was FCC Chairman and Dale Hatfield  
was brought in by Kennard to head OET.  The TAC was created and Dave  
Farber became the 2nd FCC Chief Technologist.  So while Chairman  
Powell did move the ball down the regulatory field, it was Chairman  
Kennard who started the game.  DLH]

Two Good Spectrum Proceedings Die Quietly, but Copps and Adelstein  
Keep the Faith for the Future

Submitted by Harold Feld on May 7, 2007 - 2:59pm.
<http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/930>
Several years ago, then-FCC Chairman Michael Powell attacked spectrum  
reform with true revolutionary zeal. Yes, Powell sought to recreate  
spectrum licenses as property, a move I vigorously oppose. But Powell  
also fought to make it easier for unlicensed spectrum users by  
improving the efficiency of the spectrum and facilitating spectrum  
sharing. Unsurprisingly, wireless incumbents fiercly resisted  
proposed changes that interfered with their business models.

After the departure of Powell and NTIA Administrator Michael  
Gallagher in 2005, no one remained to champion controversial wireless  
proccedings. While FCC Chairman Martin has made some progress on  
unlicensed use, such as affirming that the OTARD rules apply to  
unlicensed transceivers, moving the broadcast “white spaces”  
proceeding forward, and — in the technical but highly important  
category — making it easier for manufacturers to develop equipment  
for unlicensed use, Martin has also shown no inclination to carry on  
Powell’s crusade for spectrum reform where politically costly.

So Martin has circulated a number of orders terminating proceedings  
begun by Powell that had the potential to radically transform the  
spectrum landscape, and which therefore attracted a great deal of  
industry resistance. Friday saw the termination of two such  
proceedings: one on “interference temperature” and one on receiver  
standards. Briefly, the receiver standards proceeding would have  
explored ways to make receivers more resistant to interference.  
Generally, receivers are built as cheaply as possible and rely on the  
protections of licensing. Build receivers “smarter” and more able to  
screen out interference and you make it possible to allow other  
devices to function at a low level in the same spectrum space. This  
improves the efficiency of wireless services and allows for “smart”  
or “cognitive” radios to use the available space (often referred to  
as an “underlay”) and share the space without interfering with a  
licensed service. While nothing prevents the Commission from allowing  
the licensee to lease the newly available space via secondary  
markets, receiver standards were thought to give a boost to  
unlicensed sharing of licensed bands — and as such were subject to  
frequent attacks by proponents of converting licenses into a species  
of property. (Property proponents argued that the licensee could  
impose needed standards in a more efficeint manner if licensee had  
financial incentive to do so. I note, however, that the Commission’s  
2004 Secondary Market Order which would allow licensees to resell  
such spectrum rights has done nothing to prompt “private commons”  
leasing arrangements.)

[snip]

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com