FCC chairman backs use of 'white space' spectrum

Companies lobbying the Federal Communications Commission to access unused spectrum known as "white spaces" won a big victory on Wednesday when Chairman Kevin Martin threw his weight behind the proposal citing findings in an FCC report that was also issued Wednesday.

Martin held a press conference with reporters early in the day in which he pledged his support for the use of the white space spectrum and announced that the issue would be up for vote at the FCC's next open meeting on November 4. Martin has long been in favor of opening up additional spectrum that can be used to offer wireless broadband services.

The FCC finished testing several proof of concept devices in real world tests this summer to see if companies can develop products that use buffer spectrum between licensed broadcast channels. This spectrum known has "white space" sits between broadcast TV channels in the 150 MHz to 700 MHs spectrum bands.

The commission's Office of Engineering Technology (OET) newly released report states that devices with geo-location and sensing technologies could be used with some conditions. But the report said devices with sensing-only technology would have to undergo another round of testing within the FCC labs.

Several technology companies, including Motorola, Microsoft, and Google have been lobbying the FCC for more than a year to open up these channels, which would provide between 300 MHz to 400 MHz of unlicensed spectral capacity throughout the country that could be used by anyone.

These technology companies believe this spectrum, which is ideal for sending data wirelessly over long distances and penetrating through walls, can be used to enhance or create new wireless broadband services. And they say they can develop products and services that use this spectrum without interfering with services running on licensed spectrum in adjacent bands.

But incumbent spectrum license holders such as TV broadcasters and cell phone operators, including Verizon Wireless, say wireless devices that access this unlicensed spectrum will cause interference in the neighboring spectrum bands.

The National Association of Broadcasters and groups that use wireless microphones to broadcast during live performances or sporting events, have also opposed the use of white spaces claiming that devices using this spectrum will interfere with their services.

Chairman Martin also addressed the wireless microphone issue during the press conference. He said the FCC will reserve several channels for wireless microphones to operate.

The OET will now submit its report to the rest of the FCC commissioners for review before the November 4 vote.

[Galaxy5]

Sounds like that offer of a ride in the Google party jet hanged his mind!

[tpobrienjr]

"White space", as described, may be a politically-motivated illusion. The separation between channels exists for a good technical reason: decreased signal-to-noise ratio caused by adjacent-channel interference. It may be true that digital-signal-processing technology can make more of the white space available, but this reality must be considered, because it won't go away: just because you can transmit and receive a signal in a piece of spectrum doesn't mean there's no bandwidth or SNR cost in the adjacent channels. Do the math; ALL the math.

[galeso]

The separation of channels was done for technical reasons, but technology has advanced a great deal since the fifties. If the new digital equipment can stay in the "white space" let them use it.

[chash360]

This is the first step in providing truly free wireless services, of which all communication services should transition to, especially broadband internet. The EM spectrum belongs to all of us, it should NOT be hoarded away by corperate telco's and big media. The whole EM Spectrum can be properly and carefully managed by licensing devices, protocols and specifications, NOT corperations or individuals. The use of the EM Spectrum costs next to nothing, just the power to operate the device (and the cost of the device itself), so why should we waste so much money funneling the country's wireless communications through monopolistic corperations that claim exclusive rights to spectrum just because they paid for a lisence to monopolize. (Think of the millions that are charged for a single 30 second spot during the Superbowl, they can only get away with that through monopoly, and exclusivity.) This country could not exist without communications, just as it could not exist without transportation (the highway network). Should we license roads, highways and freeways to corperations so they can charge us a service fee to drive on them? There is a way to provide wireless commincations to everyone, everywhere without any service fees, in such a manner that we will never again run out of bandwidth. This is the first step toward that goal.

[tpobrienjr]

Gimme a break. Note who the folks are who are pushing this whitespace concept. Microsoft and Google, for example. Big bucks talk, and they come from the monopolistic corporations, whether they are telcos or not. They are taking advantage of the fact that the FCC is at an all time low in its knowledge of engineering and science, and an all time high in its political involvement. And if you think that will change when there's a change in the White House, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.