Apple, Samsung and others suggest Congress tap federal spectrum to ease 'fiscal cliff'
A group of mobile device makers including Apple, Samsung and RIM, sent a letter to top Congressional leaders asking for the allotment of additional operating spectrum dedicated to smartphones and tablets.
In the letter signed by the High Tech Spectrum Coalition (HTSC), which includes Apple, Alcatel-Lucent, Cisco, Ericsson, Intel, Nokia, Qualcomm, RIM and Samsung, the group pushed for additional spectrum, or airwaves used by cellular carriers, from certain government-held assets, reports The Hill.
Despite ongoing FTC efforts to enact a law that will liberate some spectrum currently used by TV stations, the device makers said more is needed.
"Authorizing new spectrum auctions is timely and relevant," the group said, referring to the so-called "fiscal cliff" of automatic government spending cuts and tax increases expected to hit at the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, 2012.
Instead of holding on to unused spectrum, Congress should "become more efficient" and share, vacate or lease the assets to U.S. telecoms, the companies said.
"Now is the time to ensure the incentive auctions are as robust and successful as possible at liberating spectrum," the group wrote. "We should also turn our collective attention on ways to reap the economic benefits of underutilized federal spectrum assets."
According to the letter, the coalition joined the debate because policymakers "need to know that [the tech companies] cannot simply engineer [their] way out of this problem."
In the letter signed by the High Tech Spectrum Coalition (HTSC), which includes Apple, Alcatel-Lucent, Cisco, Ericsson, Intel, Nokia, Qualcomm, RIM and Samsung, the group pushed for additional spectrum, or airwaves used by cellular carriers, from certain government-held assets, reports The Hill.
Despite ongoing FTC efforts to enact a law that will liberate some spectrum currently used by TV stations, the device makers said more is needed.
"Authorizing new spectrum auctions is timely and relevant," the group said, referring to the so-called "fiscal cliff" of automatic government spending cuts and tax increases expected to hit at the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, 2012.
Instead of holding on to unused spectrum, Congress should "become more efficient" and share, vacate or lease the assets to U.S. telecoms, the companies said.
"Now is the time to ensure the incentive auctions are as robust and successful as possible at liberating spectrum," the group wrote. "We should also turn our collective attention on ways to reap the economic benefits of underutilized federal spectrum assets."
According to the letter, the coalition joined the debate because policymakers "need to know that [the tech companies] cannot simply engineer [their] way out of this problem."
Comments
Not so much...
What the government should do is set up a private autonomous agency to lease the spectra.
Congress... Efficient... in the same sentence? HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA=HA-HA-HA!
Good one!...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
and selling these spectrums for say, even $1 trillion, would do what for the deficit?
Not so much...
Sure, this should wipe out the $16 trillion debt. No problem...Ha!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
This makes so much sense, that they'll never do it!
What the government should do is set up a private autonomous agency to lease the spectra.
Because it makes sense... this is why it'll never happen.
I disagree that this makes sense. There is no way the same telecom companies that are currently screwing over their customers with their policies should be given more spectrum. At least not without securing some drastic changes in the way they do business and price their services.
Rushing out a bill to auction off this spectrum without new industry regulations is exactly what these guys are hoping for. I consider myself conservative to libertarian politically but the telecom industry has proven time and time again that they simply can't be trusted.
-kpluck
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck
I disagree that this makes sense. There is no way the same telecom companies that are currently screwing over their customers with their policies should be given more spectrum. At least not without securing some drastic changes in the way they do business and price their services.
Rushing out a bill to auction off this spectrum without new industry regulations is exactly what these guys are hoping for. I consider myself conservative to libertarian politically but the telecom industry has proven time and time again that they simply can't be trusted.
-kpluck
Then you are surely not a libertarian (not even a small "l" one). The spectrum should be auctioned off and let free and open competition take care of the rest.
Anyone considers this rational about fiscal balance knows nothing of the problem and most certainly doesn't know jack about ultrafrequency spread spectrum.
Let the taxes expire, close the loopholes and role those changes over the course of the next 18 months.
Economic stability restored and Robber Barons are forced to reinvest infrastructurally or see the massive thefts they've procured be taken from them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck
Rushing out a bill to auction off this spectrum without new industry regulations is exactly what these guys are hoping for.
Never let a good crisis go to waste.
a heads-up/something to keep an eye on re: Apple, Samsung and others suggest Congress tap federal spectrum to ease 'fiscal cliff':
the FCC's is having an Open Meeting in Washington, DC tomorrow Wednesday, December 12, 2012, at 1:00 p.m. (EST) -- there is a "Live Webcast" link at the bottom of the agenda of the meeting at
http://www.fcc.gov/events/open-commission-meeting-december-2012
among the various items -- vis-a-vis the allotment of additional operating spectrum dedicated to smartphones and tablets -- to be addressed during the meeting [and is the first item on the agenda] is consideration a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [by Globalstar] to broaden its initiatives in unleashing broadband spectrum, promoting technological innovation, and encouraging investment via the creation of a shared access broadband service in the 3550-3650 MHz band for small cell use.
you can read more details on Globalstar's proposal and NPRM in
http://globalstar.com/en/index.php?cid=7010&pressId=751
The highlights of the proposal and filing include:
Globalstar proposes two separate but complementary terrestrial service offerings over its exclusively licensed Big LEO spectrum – a long term LTE-based service over the entirety of its spectrum and a near term terrestrial low power service (TLPS) offering over its 2.4 GHz spectrum band;
Near term, Globalstar seeks rule changes to allow the provision of TLPS within its spectrum at 2483.5-2495 MHz (AWS-5) and adjacent unlicensed Industrial, Scientific, and Medical Equipment (ISM) spectrum at 2473-2483.5 MHz;
This innovative use of the combined 22 MHz of spectrum for TLPS would help alleviate the increasing congestion that is impeding existing 802.11 ISM channels (Wi-Fi) in many areas. In effect, TLPS would increase the available Wi-Fi capacity in the United States by 33%;
As part of offering TLPS, the Company commits to deploy 20,000 free TLPS access points in the nation’s public and non-profit schools, community colleges and hospitals. Further, Globalstar agrees to provide its mobile satellite services free of charge to its customers in any federally declared disaster area following a natural or man-made disaster;
Long term, Globalstar seeks authority to construct and operate a Long Term Evolution (LTE) system within its Big LEO spectrum, after an open and transparent rulemaking proceeding to resolve any technical issues.
a copy of the NPRM in full is available at:
http://www.globalstar.com/en/ir/docs/FCC12-Petition_for_Rule_Making_Nov_13th.pdf
some brief mentions of it have appeared in:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324556304578117680495560580.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2017385/satellite-carrier-may-open-new-wifi-channel-for-us.html
TMF Associates Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) analyst Tim Farrar weighs in on the GSAT FCC NPRM:
http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2012/12/10/totally-ludicrous-or-pretty-smart/
Suing each other one minute, making sweet sweet love the next.
Weird.
Bad idea. Letting the cellular companies grab up spectrum will stifle progress and innovation in other areas that could use those frequencies. Taking bandwidth away from OTA HDTV will eliminate a method for smaller media companies to offer services and grow smaller markets. I have impressed by the number of OTA TV stations that have sprung up serving various communities in my area.
Radio has already gone down the path of being controlled by a few large corporations and look what it has netted - pre-packaged content played back by computers with no local DJ's and minimal local market input. They play what is decided by some large national company.
In bandwidth auctions large corporations or consortiums can pull together much larger funding to grab up spectrum than other smaller companies and new emerging technologies. Putting more bandwidth in the hands of a few organizations is not a good idea. It is even worse when it is companies like Verizon and AT&T who have not shown themselves to be that consumer friendly.
The "fiscal cliff" can't be fixed by selling bandwidth, just like raising the taxes on a small percentage of the population won't fix it. Comprehensive tax reform combined with drastic cutting in wasteful government spending is the only way it will be solved. It is common sense. If you raise the taxes on the very rich it won't matter - they have tax accountants, lawyers, and trust funds and tricks to find loopholes and avoid paying taxes. The ultra rich actually supported Obama in the most recent elections - they know that raising tax rates won't hurt them. And you can't have almost half the population paying no taxes. Closing the loopholes and limiting deductions to a small group of items that EVERYONE can benefit from are what needs to happen, and the same needs to happen to corporate taxes. Giving special tax breaks to one industry or group just distorts the true value of those good and services and keeps the market from working correctly. Economists and politicians can only screw up the economy, which is the mess we are in now - the economy will naturally correct itself - allocating goods, services and resources to true sustainable levels. Creating bubbles by flooding certain segments with dollars created the mess we have now along with the huge socialist handout programs that do nothing but create debt and buy votes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
and selling these spectrums for say, even $1 trillion, would do what for the deficit?
Not so much...
There is a difference between the operating deficit and the national debt. The National debt is around $16T yes, but the deficit is only about $1.4T. So selling that spectrum for $1T would wipe out most of the deficit, but it would only be a bit under 7% of the total national debt. The national debt and deficit are not interchangeable terms
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
and selling these spectrums for say, even $1 trillion, would do what for the deficit?
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Sure, this should wipe out the $16 trillion debt. No problem...Ha!
Think he was talking about the budget deficit rather than our outstanding debt.
I seem to remember AI reporting a fairly recent interview with Tim Cook when he said it wasn't worth Apple manufacturing in the US, and then several months later reporting him announcing that Apple was going to do just that. The discrepancy struck me, but now I presume he was persuaded that the loss of profits would be outweighed by casting Apple in a favourable light when lobbying the US Government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave2012
I seem to remember AI reporting a fairly recent interview with Tim Cook when he said it wasn't worth Apple manufacturing in the US, and then several months later reporting him announcing that Apple was going to do just that. The discrepancy struck me, but now I presume he was persuaded that the loss of profits would be outweighed by casting Apple in a favourable light when lobbying the US Government.
Entirely probable that Tim's meeting on Capitol Hill had to do with this.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/05/15/tim_cook_meets_with_us_speaker_of_house_john_boehner
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/05/28/tim_cooks_visit_to_washington_opens_doors_to_congress