Sprint Nextel’s argument that TerreStar Networks’ license applica...
Sprint Nextel’s argument that TerreStar Networks’ license applications should be tied to whether the company pays Sprint for clearing the broadcast auxiliary services band isn’t relevant, TerreStar told the FCC Wednesday. The International Bureau told Sprint -- when it…
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.
raised similar issues regarding ICO Global Communications’ milestone extension -- that BAS relocation wasn’t “relevant in collateral proceedings,” said Douglas Brandon, TerreStar vice president of regulatory affairs. The BAS spectrum was swept up in the 800 MHz band reconfiguration, so Sprint is paying to move BAS off the spectrum that TerreStar and ICO want to use. TerreStar and ICO will owe Sprint a pro-rata amount if they begin operations before relocation in the top 30 markets is complete, Sprint argues. Sprint also claimed that TerreStar was violating commission rules by having more than 25 percent foreign ownership. Not true, TerreStar said. Since TerreStar has yet to receive any licenses subject to the ownership limits, it “cannot be in violation of the mandate,” it said. TerreStar filed a petition for declaratory ruling regarding its ownership structure because it has applied for licenses and “the commission must make a public interest determination before it can act on TerreStar’s applications,” Brandon said.