Unlicensed

I’ve been asked to talk about where we are with spectrum policy in the United States, and what lies ahead. Federal Communications Commission. Chairman Pai has two overarching goals at the top of the Commission’s wireless agenda. First, we want to unleash spectrum to meet growing consumer demand and enable new waves of wireless innovations that will grow our economy and improve the standard of living for the American people. The second key goal of our wireless agenda is harnessing the power of spectrum to help bridge the digital divide.

One foundational principle is flexible use for wireless spectrum. Instead of mandating that a particular spectrum band be used with a specific type of wireless technology, the government should leave that choice to the private sector, which has a much better sense of consumer demand. The Commission has a role to play in crafting light-touch regulatory frameworks, with clear and technology-neutral rules. Basically, we want to put spectrum into the marketplace and then let the market and innovators go to work. Flexible use for spectrum is a proven practice. For decades, it has enabled wireless networks in the U.S. to evolve with technology and to do so much more quickly than if operators had to obtain government sign-off each step of the way. Another principle is our commitment to continue to identify possibilities to put airwaves to more efficient use. Chairman Pai believes we need an all-of-the-above approach to this spectrum endeavor, looking at low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum.

Next generation systems will capitalize on both new and existing licensed and unlicensed networks, utilizing low-, mid- and high-band spectrum, including millimeter wave frequencies. Today, I will discuss how the Commission plans to make these raw materials available.

Global Harmonization & US Leadership in Wireless Technologies. While some in this country may eschew global harmonization, and I understand that our market position means we have the option of going it alone or in coordination with a handful of other countries, offering commercial services on the same frequencies around the world has many benefits for US consumers and providers. On the consumer side, there is the ability to use your devices and have the same wireless experience at home and abroad. At the same time, the economies of scale created by marketing products internationally enables research, development, and manufacturing costs to be widely dispersed, promoting investment and innovation while reducing the cost of devices and services for Americans.

[Commentary] For 23.4 million rural Americans – roughly the population of New York City and Los Angeles and Chicago and Houston and Philadelphia and Phoenix and San Antonio and San Diego, combined –access to quality broadband internet remains out of reach. We need innovative solutions to bridge this gap and bring broadband access to rural America.

Until now, the biggest hurdle to expanding rural broadband access has been the cost- and resource- prohibitive nature of building out wired connectivity in remote areas with small populations. However, attention has shifted to an innovative new concept that leverages a resource that we already have. A resource that has been patiently waiting to be used: TV white spaces (TVWS). These so-called white spaces are large blocks of spectrum that were designed as buffer spaces between television channels. Today, these spaces remain available and unused by traditional broadcast TV stations. Innovation and infrastructure are expensive. But innovation for the sake of rural broadband - through an available, unused resource that helps talented Americans fulfill their potential - is worth every penny.

[Yack is the Chief Operations Officer at Colorado Technology Consultants]

The TV white spaces (TVWS) debate is cranking back up again thanks to a proposal that recommends that the Federal Communications Commision set aside three 6 MHz-wide TVWS channels for unlicensed use in every market across the country. The economic argument for broadband connectivity is undisputed and obvious: Without broadband connectivity, businesses can’t compete, and it’s more difficult for consumers to access critical educational, healthcare and governmental services. Today, approximately 34 million Americans currently lack basic broadband access, according to the FCC—and the majority of them, about 24 million, live in rural areas that simply do not have infrastructure in place to enable it.

To address the gap, strategies for making inexpensive unlicensed spectrum available to ISPs have been a cornerstone of the FCC’s plan to bridge the digital divide. The FCC previously ruled that the 600 MHz duplex gap between 652-663 MHz and Channel 37 would be not be sold to wireless carriers and would be available on an unlicensed basis, once the recent TV spectrum incentive auction was over—given that that broadcasters would be vacating that real estate. The FCC also has an unfinalized notice of proposed rulemaking that would reserve an additional 6 MHz channel in each broadcast market for unlicensed use, at 54-608 MHz. It’s the future of this last band that’s at stake. A bipartisan coalition of 43 Congressional representatives asked the FCC earlier this summer to reserve at least three TV white space channels in the 600 MHz band to support rural broadband deployments—a plan first proposed by Microsoft.

The National Association of Broadcasters is firing back at a letter from tech executives who wrote the Federal Communications Commission in support of reserving broadcast band channels, so called "white spaces," for unlicensed device use. A group of tech company execs banding together as Voices for Innovation Aug 22 raised their voices in support of a proposal by Microsoft that the FCC reserve channels in the white spaces of the broadcast TV band for unlicensed devices as a way to promote rural broadband deployment. NAB is no fan of the plan, and made that clear in its response to the tech exec letter on TV white spaces. That letter talked up the use of the unlicensed spectrum to get broadband to 34 million more homes. Broadband deployment is a signature issue for the FCC under new chairman Ajit Pai.

Often sparring partners, the wireless industry and public interest advocates both came out in support of the AIRWAVES Act — but with very different hopes for where the legislation would lead.

The bill instructs the Federal Communications Commission to auction off the government-controlled spectrum of radio frequencies used for wireless communication, with the first auction to be held by next December. The bill would allow some spectrum for exclusive, or “licensed” use, as well as some for shared, or “unlicensed” use. Public interest advocates have pushed the FCC to give more access to unlicensed users by allowing them to share spectrum with private companies who get exclusive rights to certain bands. Those with licenses argue sharing can interfere with their signals. The AIRWAVES bill, which stands for Advancing Innovation and Reinvigorating Widespread Access to Viable Electromagnetic Spectrum, leaves the matter up to the FCC.

On June 21, 2017, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai regarding wireless spectrum, writing, "I am pleased to hear that the Commission may be considering a new proceeding to identify new spectrum uses in a range of bands. As you look for ways to better utilize spectrum, I urge you to explore possible new allocations in the mid-band frequencies, perhaps including the 3.7 GHz and 6 GHz bands, and to begin a rulemaking proceeding focused on opening mid-band spectrum for both licensed and unlicensed networks."

On July 18, Chairman Pai responded by saying, "I have asked my colleagues at the Commission's August Open Meeting to initiate a new inquiry into opportunities for next-generation services--particularly wire less broadband services- in the spectrum range of 3. 7 GHz to 24 GHz. This inquiry will be conducted in close coordination with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and will focus on exploring opportunities in the mid-band frequencies for expanded flexible use. This inquiry will also explore long-term strategies the Commission can pursue to promote expanded spectrum access to meet the growing demand."

[Commentary] Microsoft recently made a Very Serious Announcement about deploying unused television airwaves to solve the digital divide in America. News outlets ate it up. Here's what's really going on: Microsoft is aiming to be the soup-to-nuts provider of Internet of Things devices, software, and consulting services to zillions of local and national governments around the world.

Microsoft doesn't want to have to rely on existing mobile data carriers to execute those plans. Why? Because the carriers will want a pound of flesh—a percentage—in exchange for shipping data generated by Microsoft devices from Point A to Point B. These costs can become very substantial over zillions of devices in zillions of cities. The carriers have power because, in many places, they are the only ones allowed to use airwave frequencies—spectrum—under licenses from local governments for which they have paid hundreds of millions of dollars. To eliminate that bottleneck, it will be good to have
unlicensed spectrum available everywhere, and cheap chipsets and devices available that can opportunistically take advantage of that spectrum.

[Susan Crawford is the John A. Reilly Clinical Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.]

Anyone who has spent half a minute working on wireless communications issues knows that America’s wireless providers need additional spectrum to expand existing network capacity and/or deploy new technologies (e.g., 5G). Such constraints apply to both licensed and unlicensed spectrum users. While spectrum isn’t necessarily finite, current technical limitations make it so. This means that there is constant and appropriate pressure on the Federal Communications Commission to identify underutilized spectrum bands and reallocate them for new commercial purposes. Next generation wireless networks will require high, mid and low band spectrum.

While the Commission has taken steps to provide high and low band resources, more attention needs to be paid to the mid bands. So, when presented with a viable proposal that would free spectrum for licensed and unlicensed purposes while protecting or accommodating incumbent licensees, the Commission should grab it with both hands and rejoice. That exact scenario presents itself in the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz and 6 GHz bands. The Commission has the chance to reallocate key bands in a way that would provide needed spectrum for both licensed and unlicensed networks without harming incumbent users. Accordingly, we should tee up the private sector idea outlined above in a quick manner -- whether as part of a longer Notice of Inquiry or a separate, more targeted proceeding -- in the very near future. I, for one, believe doing otherwise would put U.S. spectrum leadership in question and threaten the longevity and viability of America’s broad wireless community.