NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information

 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] [dave@farber.net: [IP] re Google asks FCC to appoint it a "white space" database admin]



----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> -----

Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 19:35:00 -0500
From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: [IP] re Google asks FCC to appoint it a "white space" database admin
Reply-To: dave@farber.net
To: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>





Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Josephson <dlj@josephson.com>
> Date: January 6, 2010 7:20:36 PM EST
> To: dave@farber.net
> Subject: Re: [IP] re Google asks FCC to appoint it a "white space"  
> database admin
>

> Dave,
>
> Having watched the "white space" proceedings as a microphone  
> manufacturer (although we don't make wireless mics) and chair of the  
> Audio Engineering Society standards working group on microphones, it  
> has amazed me that such a complex proposal actually got approved.  
> Frankston's and Weinstein's concerns are well taken. A more likely  
> scenario is that since the whitespace rules are so restrictive, no one 
> will deploy devices that even claim to be compliant with them. I know of 
> no device that has been approved by the FCC for production to date. It's 
> almost as if the broadcasters and wireless carriers wanted to be sure 
> there would be no one using this spectrum legally.
>
> I see nothing wrong with having Google be a whitespace database admin, 
> though, assuming that devices can actually be made that comply with the 
> rules. Being a big target for adverse PR is probably a stronger 
> incentive for them to behave fairly than anything that could be devised 
> to keep a smaller organization honest. Also, the FCC requirements for 
> the database pretty much ensure that it's demonstrated to afford equal 
> access. The actual operation of the whitespace database has not yet been 
> defined, so the jury is still out with regard to how it can be operated 
> fairly.
>
> The concern of *who* operates the database is less important than *how* 
> it operates -- and I've seen little coverage of that. Perhaps Google and 
> their cohorts in the "White Spaces Database Working Group" will be 
> forthcoming on that point. It's not going anywhere until someone reduces 
> it to workable practice.
>
> --
> David Josephson



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

----- End forwarded message -----