[opendtv] Cable Sides With Broadcasters in White Space Battle

Having cable on their side is the only chance broadcasters have to make
this right, IMO.

Bert

--------------------------
http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/77202

Cable Sides With Broadcasters in White Space Battle
by Doug Lung, 03.27.2009

White space device proponents that dismiss concerns about interference
to over-the-air broadcast TV may have second thoughts after reading a
petition from The National Cable and Telecommunications Association
(NCTA) regarding unlicensed operation in the TV bands.

NCTA warns that the rules, as they currently exist, will allow TV band
devices (TVDBs) to operate at power levels that will cause significant
interference to cable TV reception, especially digital services. Other
services that depend on the cable TV signal, including cable modem
Internet access and telephone service, may also be affected. These
conclusions are based on a study by consulting engineering firm Carl T.
Jones that showed real world interference was worse than what was
originally predicted. Personal/portable TVDBs were found to cause
interference to cable TV reception up to 80 feet away.

To get an understanding of how bad the problem is, consider this
scenario outlined in the NCTA Petition:

"As for the other measures suggested in the explanatory language, they
are either inapplicable to residents of adjacent apartments or wishful
thinking. A person experiencing interference is very unlikely to suspect
the cause, let alone where it may be coming from. The person causing the
interference to a neighbor is unlikely to be aware of it and,
furthermore, will have little motive to correct it. Even in the unlikely
event that the source of the interference is identified and the
neighbors are willing to cooperate in solving it, the device's producer
is unlikely to 'cooperate in helping consumers to rectify any such
interference.' After all, the transmitter will likely be manufactured by
an offshore company, sold to an equipment supplier, hence through a
retailer to the customer. No one in that chain is going to do a house
call to attempt to fix the problem. Even if they did, the options
suggested are not realistic - the back of a TV set may be more sensitive
than the front, but turning the picture towards the wall is not a viable
solution. Alternately it is unrealistic to expect the innocent resident
experiencing interference to rearrange his furniture so as to move the
TV to a different location, or to remove a signal splitter and thus
forgo a second outlet or use of a digital video recorder. If the problem
is signal pickup in wires buried in the wall between the apartments,
should the building owner be obligated to tear out and replace his
entire in-building television cabling? Does the owner of the white
spaces device have to agree to never use his laptop in the living room?
None of these remedies is realistic in practice. Furthermore, after
thousands or millions of these devices are sold and in service, there is
no retroactive means of fixing widespread interference should it occur."

When it appeared a relatively small percentage of TV viewers out of the
15-25 percent of viewers depending on over-the-air TV might lose their
TV reception on Feb. 17, Congress and the FCC moved with extraordinary
speed to delay the analog shutdown and to require broadcasters to take
additional measures to educate viewers about the coming changes. Imagine
the political backlash when cable TV viewers start complaining about
their cable Internet connections slowing down and an ever increasing
number of cable channels disappearing as TVBDs turn on around them. Many
viewers that had problems receiving over-the-air DTV signals will turn
to cable TV. Many cable TV companies have offered reduced rates to help
these viewers. They won't be happy if a TVBD wipes out their favorite
channel on cable TV.

NCTA backs up its concerns with solid engineering in its 144 page
petition. NCTA also asks for changes to protect cable TV headends. NCTA
is not asking for a ban on TVBDs, but its petition offers solutions
including reduced power levels for personal portable devices (50 mW is
suggested as a compromise), increased separation for fixed devices or
reduced power (400 feet from buildings or a 1 watt power limit),
restricting operation of fixed devices in some areas around cable TV
headends, and allowing registration of headends in the database
regardless of location

Cable TV won't disappear-some cable channels do not fall in TV broadcast
spectrum and TVBDs will not be able to operate on every channel in the
TV bands, but since there is no "white space" on cable TV, someone's
favorite channel or digital service is likely to be affected.

The Community Broadcasters Association (CBA) Petition for
Reconsideration is shorter-only 3 pages-and it makes a simple argument.
"The protections adopted by the Commission appear to be based on the
assumed reception of LPTV stations by only digital receivers, when in
fact the vast majority of those stations continue to transmit analog
signals, are under no deadline to transition to digital operation, and
will continue to be viewed on analog receivers which have different
interference-rejection characteristics. More protection is needed for
LPTV stations viewed on analog receivers."

CBA continues, "Given the acknowledged fact that the undesired signal
must be 9 or 14 dB weaker if a protected first-adjacent channel LPTV
station is analog, it is apparent that a uniform maximum power level for
unlicensed devices is arbitrary and irrational." CBA asked the FCC to
reduce the maximum power by 9 dB for unlicensed portable devices
operating on an upper first adjacent channel and by 14 dB for operation
on a lower first-adjacent channel. It said the FCC must increase the
minimum mileage separation where the protected station is analog, in
addition to other adjustments needed to take into account the
interference characteristics of analog TV sets.

The Petition for Reconsideration filed by the Society of Broadcast
Engineers (SBE) says the 40 mW adjacent channel power limit for
personal/portable devices TVBDs is too high and "will not protect
consumers and is not justified technically." SBE said variable power
levels are not a solution, as weak signals can occur anywhere within a
DTV station's protected contour. All viewers should be protected. A much
lower power level, such as 2 mW, was suggested. Devices using
spectrum-sensing technology should not be allowed "unless and until
certain fundamental problems are resolved," SBE states, and the current
sensing requirement should be made more rigorous and "should enhance
protection for wireless microphones." SBE expressed concerns about the
geolocation concept, saying the Commission failed to adequately address
a number of geolocation and database issues.

SBE devotes a section of its petition to mobile broadcasting operations,
stating, "The Commission correctly pointed out that 'future broadcast
uses of the television band will have the right to interference
protection from TV band devices.' Although it confirmed that 'future
primary use of the band by broadcasters [must] be protected,' the
Commission failed to account for new mobile television operations (which
are in the process of being introduced and were cited in the comments to
this proceeding). The Open Mobile Video Coalition has stated that
'broadcasters have declared their intention to launch mobile DTV across
63 stations in 22 markets, covering 35 percent of U.S. television
households' in 2009. SBE explains that the FCC assumed an interference
distance of 16 meters for TVBDs. For mobile operations, the interference
distance is either 1 or 2 meters. Mobile DTV "will be immediately
threatened by WSDs."

Like CBA, SBE points out that the TVDB rules do not protect analog LPTV
and TV translator operations. The bias in the rules towards
personal/portable devices could actually prohibit wireless Internet
service providers (WISPs) and others from providing fixed broadband
services in rural areas, SBE argues, because the Section 15.711(f)
prohibits a fixed consumer premise device from operating as a client to
a fixed WISP base station.

The Petitions for Reconsideration from NCTA, CBA, SBE along with all
other filings in the unlicensed TV band devices proceeding are available
through the FCC Search for Filed Comments web page. Put 04-186 in box 1,
"Proceeding." Because of the large number of filings in this proceeding,
you may want to limit the search by putting a search term such as
"broadcast' or "wireless" in Box 4, "Filed on Behalf of" to limit search
responses to filers with those words in their name.
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: