Media Access Project (MAP) defended new FCC rules on non-federal ...
Media Access Project (MAP) defended new FCC rules on non-federal govt. wireless operations in the 3650-3700 MHz band. The order, adopted earlier this year, provides for nationwide, non-exclusive licensing of terrestrial operations. The order stipulates use of a contention-…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
based protocol requirement and mandatory registration of fixed and base stations with an obligation to avoid interference to new entrants. Motorola, Intel, Redline Communications, Wireless Communications Assn., WiMAX Forum, Satellite Industry Assn., Enterprise Wireless Alliance and BRN Phoenix sought reconsideration. MAP disputed that request. “The rules developed for 3650-3700 MHz represent a bold deregulatory step by the Commission and should have time to prove themselves in the market conditions,” MAP said. It said a licensed regime, which many petitioners back, “would engender significant delay while service rules are developed and would foreclose use of the band by anyone unable to pay the upfront fee for licenses.” Citing the success of wireless ISPs (WISPs) and community wireless networks (CWNs) in substituting for damaged critical communications infrastructure after Hurricane Katrina, MAP said the new 3.6 GHz rules would enable WISPs and CWN within a year to provide “more extensive services more quickly, particularly with 25-watt transmitters for backhaul and wide-area networks.” Saying manufacturers such as Cisco and Tropos back the rules, MAP urged the FCC to rebuff claims by Motorola and cohort that “no one” would develop equipment in the space. MAP said it’s “not uncommon” for firms to differ on the degree of specificity in rules on technology or sharing mechanisms: “It has been fairly common for large companies to wait while entrepreneurial companies develop new equipment and industry standards. After the market has settled, the larger companies buy the successful entrepreneurs.” MAP also stressed the need to resolve the matter quickly to speed investment in new gear.