[opendtv] Re: FCC TAKES STEPS TO ALLOW NEW LOW POWER DEVICES ON VACANT TV CHANNELS

  • From: John Willkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 00:03:50 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

The hospitals bought devices on the wrong frequencies.  They bear all the costs 
of changing their frequencies to lawful ones.  The sticky issue is that their 
patients -- were you to just blindly transmit -- would bear life-threatening 
risks.

In many cases, this gear is used in Intensive Care Units.  Where the toughest 
cases are under constant watch by these devices.  Perhaps the only greater 
concern of the U.S. government on a domestic basis is that planes land where 
they intend to.

Heretofore, these frequencies were only allocated to broadcast uses.  Some -- 
maybe many -- of the wireless mike/ifb units qualify under those.  ESPN, due to 
the ABC tie, can use wireless mics on these frequencies on a secondary basis.  
Some cable networks (tough requirements there) have passed through all the 
hoops.  Not many, however.

However, these are point and temporary uses, rare in number, and at least are 
done by broadcast engineering types.  Having every grandmother broadcast using 
these frequencies, and even trying it from their cars (remember the guys 
playing porno DVDs on the tv sets in their SUVs?) is another type of issue.

John Willkie

-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Miller <robmxa@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Oct 17, 2006 7:04 PM
>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [opendtv] Re: FCC TAKES STEPS TO ALLOW NEW LOW POWER DEVICES ON 
>VACANT TV CHANNELS
>
>OK, on topic let me show my ignorance and learn something.
>
>In testing on TV spectrum I have run into the problem of having to
>notify all hospitals of impending use of spectrum that was TV
>broadcast spectrum but for some reason was allowed to be used by other
>medical devices.
>
>You add microphones, what else is there and are all these uses legal?
>Can anyone use such devices now and if so how is the new FCC
>initiative different? Is the new initiative just allowing more devices
>or a higher power?
>
>Ignorance was bliss.
>
>Back to the conspiracy theory. Maybe all these forays against OTA are
>benign cancers of neglect or disinterest but they are adding up to a
>conspiracy of unintended consequences or possibly chaos theory.
>Whatever they don't bode good for OTA.
>
>Bob Miller
>
>On 10/17/06, Hunold, Ken <KRH@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised, but my point has been missed (or
>> perhaps co-opted.)
>>
>> The type of interference I am referring to is not direct interference to
>> broadcast stations by unlicensed wireless devices.  This could be the
>> case at the edge of coverage for broadcast stations, but that is a
>> different debate.
>>
>> The sort of interference that I am talking about affects the TV
>> Production industry that feeds the broadcast, cable, and other
>> entertainment industries.  Unlicensed devices could affect every live
>> news and sports program origination, and it would be very difficult to
>> find the source of the problems that these devices would cause.
>>
>> Set aside the drama and rhetoric and please look at this from an
>> engineering perspective.  Don't assume that this is part of some master
>> plan to kill OTA broadcasting.
>>
>> Ken Hunold
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Bob Miller
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 4:01 PM
>> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [opendtv] Re: FCC TAKES STEPS TO ALLOW NEW LOW POWER DEVICES ON
>> VACANT TV CHANNELS
>>
>> Somebody gets it! Be still my pacemaker (and numerous hospital type
>> devices??)
>>
>> No one going to mention broadband over power lines or gas pipes? Of
>> course neither of those will leak right?
>>
>> It looks like a full court press on OTA spectrum to me. Has since 2000.
>>
>> Like former Chairman Powell said in reference to the low numbers of
>> viewers who still depend on OTA, "What are we protecting?"
>>
>> Doesn't look like they plan on protecting anything much. And what about
>> that auction that is coming up? Many say it will dwarf the cell auction
>> we just had that brought in $14 billion. So some upstart
>> Congress-critter has to be day dreaming about just what channels 2-51
>> would bring.
>>
>> The only fly in this ointment is the success that OTA is having over
>> there, over just about any there. And this will all come to pass in
>> early 2009??? Just after China shows off its new OTA at the Olympics in
>> the summer of 2008.
>>
>> All the ammunition is dry and the pile is getting bigger. All someone
>> has to do is lob in a small mortar round and we know what that looks
>> like.
>>
>> Bob Miller
>>
>> On 10/13/06, flyback1 <flyback1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > I see this as a not so subtle jab by the FCC at the free to air
>> > broadcasters.
>> >
>> > Hunold, Ken wrote:
>> >
>> > >Broadcasters *already* use this space, if only indirectly.  Wireless
>> > >microphones, for one, already use these frequencies in the TV band.
>> > >This is a huge hornet's nest that has been kicked recently by these
>> > >attempts to allow unlicensed devices to use these frequencies.  There
>>
>> > >is much to suggest that these new devices will not play well with
>> others.
>> > >News, Sports, and Entertainment productions stand to be impacted
>> > >greatly by this step.  Just because there isn't a TV station
>> > >operating on a frequency does not mean that it is "unused."
>> > >
>> > >Ken Hunold
>> > >
>> > >-----Original Message-----
>> > >From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > >[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> > >On Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
>> > >Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 4:08 PM
>> > >To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > >Subject: [opendtv] FCC TAKES STEPS TO ALLOW NEW LOW POWER DEVICES ON
>> > >VACANT TV CHANNELS
>> > >
>> > >A lot of positive opinions about this move to use the so-called TV
>> > >white spaces, from each of the commissioners, is also available at
>> > >http://www.fcc.gov/, under 12 October.
>> > >
>> > >The going-in assumption seems to be that this "unused" space would be
>>
>> > >used by Internet broadband access providers, and it would be
>> unlicensed.
>> > >But heck, if it's available, then why don't broadcasters themselves
>> > >go for it? Depending what the specifics are to be, e.g. on power
>> > >limits, broadcasters might make good use of it too, no?
>> > >
>> > >Are they permitted?
>> > >
>> > >Bert
>> > >
>> > >-------------------------------------
>> > >http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267867A1.pdf
>> > >
>> > >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:
>> > >October 12, 2006       Bruce Romano
>> > >(202) 418-2470
>> > >
>> > >FCC TAKES STEPS TO ALLOW NEW LOW POWER DEVICES ON VACANT TV CHANNELS
>> > >
>> > >Washington, D.C. -  The Commission today adopted a First Report and
>> > >Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking taking the first
>> > >important steps toward allowing new low power devices to operate in
>> > >the broadcast television spectrum at locations where channels in that
>>
>> > >spectrum are not in use by television stations or other authorized
>> > >services.   This action will enable the development of new and
>> > >innovative types of devices and services for businesses and
>> consumers.
>> > >
>> > >In the First Report and Order, the Commission concluded that fixed
>> > >low power devices can be allowed to operate on TV channels in areas
>> > >where those frequencies are not being used for TV or other incumbent
>> > >licensed services.  The Commission declined to permit operation on TV
>>
>> > >channel 37 that is used by radio astronomy and wireless medical
>> > >telemetry services; and on TV channels 52-69, which have been
>> > >reallocated for public safety and other mobile services.  It also
>> > >declined to permit the operation of personal/portable devices on TV
>> > >channels 14-20, which are used by public safety service in 13 cities,
>>
>> > >leaving for further consideration the issue of whether fixed devices
>> > >might be used in that band.  Marketing of such devices may commence
>> > >on February 18, 2009, after the digital television
>> > >(DTV) transition is complete and all TV stations are in operation on
>> > >their permanent DTV channels.
>> > >
>> > >In the Further Notice, the Commission invited further comment on a
>> > >number of issues that were raised in response to the Notice of
>> > >Proposed Rule Making.  It solicited additional information that is
>> > >needed to determine whether personal/portable devices can operate in
>> > >any of the TV channels without causing harmful interference.  It also
>>
>> > >invited comment to explore whether low power devices should be
>> > >permitted on TV channels 2-4, which are used by TV interface devices
>> > >such as VCRs, and whether fixed low power devices can be permitted on
>> TV channels 14-20.
>> > >
>> > >The Commission made detailed technical proposals to facilitate use of
>>
>> > >a dynamic frequency selection (DFS) mechanism to ensure that TV band
>> > >devices operate only on vacant TV channels.  In addition, it sought
>> > >further comment on implementation details for the geo-location and
>> > >control signal interference avoidance approaches discussed in the
>> > >Notice in this proceeding.
>> > >
>> > >The Commission reaffirmed its commitment to developing a complete
>> > >record to ensure that the final rules will protect TV broadcasting
>> > >and other service against harmful interference.  In particular, it
>> > >invited parties to submit test results showing that TV band devices
>> > >will not cause harmful interference.  In addition, the Commission
>> > >noted that it plans to conduct extensive testing itself to assess the
>>
>> > >potential interference from low power devices operating in the TV
>> > >bands before adopting final rules.
>> > >
>> > >The Commission also invited comment on the desirability of requiring
>> > >licensing for devices operating in the TV bands. While the Commission
>>
>> > >noted that a majority of the commenters have expressed interest in
>> > >operating low power devices in the TV bands on an unlicensed basis,
>> > >it sought comments on the relative benefits of both the licensed and
>> > >unlicensed  approaches.
>> > >
>> > >Action by the Commission October 12, 2006, by First Report and Order
>> > >and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (FCC 06-156).  Chairman
>> > >Martin, Commissioners Copps, Adelstein, Tate, and McDowell.  Separate
>>
>> > >statements issued by Chairman Martin, Commissioners Copps, Adelstein,
>>
>> > >Tate and McDowell.
>> > >
>> > >Office of Engineering and Technology contact:  Mr. Hugh L. Van Tuyl,
>> > >(202) 418-7506, e-mail Hugh.VanTuyl@xxxxxxxx
>> > >
>> > >ET Docket Nos. 04-186 and 02-380.
>> > >
>> > >FCC-
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >- 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.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >-----------------------------------------
>> > >This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential
>> > >information intended for a specific individual and purpose.  If you
>> > >are not the intended recipient, delete this message.  If you are not
>> > >the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking
>> > >any action based on this message is strictly prohibited.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >- 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.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > 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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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.
>>
>>
> 
> 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>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.
>

 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: