Invasion Of The TV Snatchers? White Space Devices Will Kill Us All!
from the a-little-over-the-top dept
The debate over white space spectrum has gone on for quite some time. Basically, the FCC handed out a ton of spectrum (for free, mind you) to TV broadcasters years ago. In order to prevent against interference, there's always been a requirement for some "buffer" space. However, as technology has improved, the need for this buffer space has decreased, and plenty of tech companies would be interested in making use of some of that basically unused spectrum by having it set aside as open spectrum. Earlier this year, some of those companies, led by Microsoft and Google, delivered a device to the FCC to test. Unfortunately, the device had some problems. However, the concept is sound -- and with some tweaking, it's quite reasonable that such a device could work without interfering with TV signals. But you wouldn't know that from broadcasters, who love to hoard their spectrum. Matthew Lasar writes in to note that in responding to the device, the broadcasters have gone way over the top in describing the horrible things that will happen if the white space is made available:"Why would the FCC consider allowing millions and millions of these interference causing devices, like 'germs,' to spread throughout America with the ability to attack the TV receivers in people's homes, apartments, hotel rooms, hospital rooms, dormitories, etc., with no way for the owner of the TV set (the 'victim') to determine who was causing the 'illness' to his or her TV set?"They also suggest that allowing this white space to be used would "risk the outrage of America's citizenry." Of course, it's important to remember that only a small percentage of TV watchers actually run this risk. The vast majority of TV owners in the US have cable or satellite TV -- meaning that they don't use the over-the-air broadcasts that use the spectrum in question. So, the "outrage" would be limited to the small group of people who still use over-the-air systems to watch broadcast TV and are close enough to a device that uses this white space in the unlikely situation when that device might temporarily interfere with their TV signals. But, apparently, with that tiny probability out there, opening up that white space is like a "germ" that will "attack" people's TVs, raising the "outrage of America's citizenry."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: spectrum, television, white space
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The Germs......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Germs......
I see you've been contaminated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd be annoyed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free TV Bands
If so then this issue woud be moot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you believe that "truth" lives on or in ANY media organisation I have this really nice bridge you might want to buy.
BTW, did you know that the word "gullible" is not listed in any dictionary!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, maybe ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still annoyed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some Still Use OTA
- make up about 10% of TV-watching households
- have voted with their wallets NOT to pay for Cable TV, NOT to pay for satellite, etc. They have self-segregated themselves as people for whom TV is relatively unimportant.
- would probably see no interference from the use of whitespace (needs to be tested and verified, which is what is actually happening).
So how much should government sacrifice in order to guarantee these people ongoing reruns of Everyone Loves Raymond? I'd say little. In my opinion, there should be
NO broadcast of TV OTA. It is a waste of a massive swath of the very best spectrum, which could be liberated for mobile communications instead.
With cable, FiOS Telco TV, satellite, NetFlix, and the Internet, there are many other ways for people to get mass media into their homes. It's only momentum that keeps this wasteful allocation in public policy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yep, i too think fuzzy tv channels are comparable to head trauma, lost limbs, disfiguring burns, and death
perhaps a more apt road-based analogy is that most roads are designed to accommodate cars (majority) and not horse and buggies (minority)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, the irony. It's wonderful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]