[CWN-Summit] Action Alert on Upcoming FCC Proceeding

Harold Feld hfeld at mediaaccess.org
Mon Nov 8 15:21:41 CST 2004


Feel free to redistribute.  I've tried to come up with a basic summary of 
issues for the unlicensed in the broadcast bands proceeding.  Although the 
deadline is Nov. 30, feel free to file comments earlier if you wish.

Harold
MEDIA ACCESS PROJECT ACTION ALERT
FCC PROCEEDING: UNLICENSED UNDERLAY IN BROADCAST BANDS PROPOSAL TERRIBLY 
FLAWED. COMMENTS NEEDED TO SUPPORT CHANGES TO PROPOSED RULES.

Contact: Harold Feld, Associate Director, Media Access Project
                 hfeld at mediaaccess.org

The FCC has proposed allowing low power unlicensed use in the broadcast 
bands.  Specifically, the FCC proposes a scheme to allow use of “vacant 
channels” (as defined in the official Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)) 
for low-power unlicensed transmitters.
If done correctly, this could provide a tremendous boost to efforts to 
create both commercial and non-commercial wireless networks.  The relevant 
frequency bands have physical characteristics that make them particularly 
valuable for unlicensed access.  It takes much less power to send a signal 
at these frequencies, and the transmitted signal can penetrate obstacles 
that signals at 2.4 GHz or higher will not penetrate. Even very low power 
signals in these bands can provide important coverage in urban, suburban, 
and rural environments.
But the FCC has not proposed a viable set of rules.  The proposed rules 
allow television broadcasters, all of whom received their broadcast 
licenses for free, to charge fees for access to broadcast spectrum.  The 
FCC further hobbles the potential for networking through its refusal to 
trust the reliability of already proven technologies for interference 
control.  It therefore requires mitigation measures that will make it 
practically impossible for community wireless networks (CWNs) and low-cost 
commercial wireless internet service providers (WISPs) to use of the 
frequencies.

The proposed FCC rules would:
    * Require all devices to accept a “command signal” from broadcasters, 
allowing broadcasters to dictate the ability of any wireless network or 
device to access broadcast spectrum.  Broadcasters may receive 
“compensation” for this service. This will essentially foreclose community 
networks, small ISPs, and transmission of content that competes with 
broadcast television.  While “pilot beacons” that signal when spectrum is 
or isn’t available may become a valuable tool for allowing greater access 
to public spectrum, the FCC proposal places all the power in the hands of 
the broadcasters.
    * Require all devices using broadcast spectrum to transmit an “ID 
beacon” containing the owner’s personal contact information.  While 
intended to allow broadcasters to find sources of interference, this would 
also allows any thief or hacker access into your laptop, PDA, or other wifi 
enabled device.  Again, while ID beacons may help foster increased public 
access in some circumstances, the FCC’s proposal as written raises serious 
concerns.
    * Require “professional installation” for any non-portable device used 
for networking.  This requirement would impose a heavy burden on volunteer 
community wireless networks, particularly those communities for which 
English is not a first language.
    * Mandate GPS location technology, an expensive form of location 
technology, rather than permit cheaper alternatives.

The flaws in the FCC’s proposal derive from a combination of timid vision 
by the agency and a failure to understand the realities driving unlicensed 
networking.   Public comment on relevant issues can persuade the agency to 
correct the problems in the proposal.

MAP asks on all individuals and organizations interested in the deployment 
wireless networks to file comments with the FCC.  MAP urges interested 
parties to tell the FCC:

    * Broadcasters, who have received their spectrum licenses for free on 
condition that they serve the public interest, should not have the power to 
tax wireless networks by imposing access fees.
    * Broadcasters should have no ability to control access to public 
spectrum, particularly where broadcasters have an interest in controlling 
the nature of public access.
    * The FCC does not create access rules to benefit broadcasters, but to 
protect the viewing public from harmful interference with free, over the 
air television.  The FCC should rely on technologies that place control in 
the hands of users – such as reliance on dynamic power and frequency 
controls – rather than protect broadcasters from competition.
    * The FCC should not mandate ID beacons for portable devices.  This is 
an invitation to identity theft, security breaches or worse.  Nor does it 
address any interference issues.  No single laptop or PDA is going to 
interfere with a licensee.
    * The FCC should not require professional installation of unlicensed 
devices.  This imposes an unfair burden on community wireless networks, 
small WISPs, and non-English speakers.
    * The FCC should not mandate specific technologies.  For example, it 
should not require GPS, but should instead require that all devices 
demonstrate an ability to “know” its precise location and change its 
behavior accordingly.

Anyone can file comments at the FCC.  Even if the comment and reply comment 
deadlines have passed, interested parties can continue to file comments 
using the procedure outlined below.
Contrary to popular belief, the FCC really does read public comments and 
really does care about them.  At the same time, the FCC does not just count 
noses.  A comment that just reads AI like unlicensed@ or Adon=t just give 
spectrum to greedy broadcasters, give it to the people@ doesn’t help as 
much as something more detailed.  Most important are comments that provide 
either technical information or real world experiences that underscore the 
value of unlicensed wireless access.

             A copy (PDF) of the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 
available at:
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-113A1.pdf>http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-113A1.pdf 
The docket number for the proceeding is ET 04-186.


How To File Comments
Anyone with Internet access can file a comment just by going to the FCC=s 
webpage and typing in the window provided (scroll down to the bottom of the 
page).  The FCC will accept written comments in Word, WordPerfect, or PDF 
format.  You can also type in short comments directly to the FCC on its 
comments webpage at:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi.
If you write comments, you should include at the top the name of the 
proceeding and the Docket No.  You must also include in the written 
comments the date of filing, your name, and an address where you can be 
reached. You do not need to be a lawyer, or even a U.S. citizen, to write 
or file comments before the FCC.
When you go to file your comments, the docket number should be entered as 
04-186 (ignore the letters that designate which bureau has 
jurisdiction).  The FCC=s webpage is relatively self-explanatory about what 
information is required and how to attach any files.  At the end of the 
process, you will receive a confirmation from the FCC that your comments 
were filed.  You may wish to print this out and save it for your files.
You may view other comments in this proceeding by using the FCC=s 
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) search function available at:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

A Style Guide For Drafting Comments To The FCC
Be polite- The staff at the FCC are real people with human feelings.  They 
do not appreciate hearing that they are morons or losers or corrupt 
servants of special interests.  If you abuse them, they will disregard your 
comments. That=s just human nature.

Explain yourself- Many of the people who will read your comments are not 
engineers or are engineers unfamiliar with the specific issues you 
describe.  If you assume an audience generally familiar with the issues but 
with no technical training, you will probably hit the right level.  At the 
same time, do include complex technical or economic information where 
can.  This is important in building the record.  If you have lengthy 
technical comments, try having a plain English summary at the beginning 
followed by technical comments.  Make sure you explain all acronyms.

Give details- The FCC needs to hear about real world experiences in the 
field.  Even if you are just a general supporter of unlicensed access 
services such as wifi, try to put details in the comments that relate the 
particular proceeding to your experience.  For example, if you are a 
business, discuss the economic impact of unlicensed access and how you 
would benefit from expanding unlicensed access.  If you are an community 
volunteer, discuss how community wireless networks have improved your 
community.

While there is no page limit (some filings are hundreds of pages long), try 
to stick to essentials.  A shorter document will be given preferential 
treatment by staffers than a longer one that says the same thing.  This is 
simply human nature.

How To Stay Involved
You can always check how a docket is going by clicking to the FCC=s ECFS 
search page: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi.  As with 
filing a comment, enter the docket numbers as 04-186.  Comments will appear 
in chronological order, with the most recently filed comment at the top.
Media Access Project, New America Foundation, Free Press, and the Champaign 
Urbana Wireless Internet Network will continue to update their websites 
with new information on this issue.  The relevant websites are:
MAP: http://ww.mediaaccess.org
NAF: http://www.spectrumpolicy.org.
Free Press: http://www.freepress.net/wifi/
CUWIN: <http://www.cuwireless.net/>http://www.cuwireless.net

In addition, the Washington Internet Project (http://www.cybertelecom.org) 
is a good resource for FCC proceedings that relate to internet issues 
before the FCC, including unlicensed access.
  Harold Feld writes a blog about wireless issues (among other things) 
called Tales of the Sausage Factory hosted at www.wetmachine.com.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Broadcast bands action alert.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 42496 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/private/cwn-summit/attachments/20041108/ccce9673/Broadcastbandsactionalert.doc


More information about the CWN-Summit mailing list