using them currently, then I would suppose your "exclusive" rights would
hold up, but am unaware of any legal precedence to show this.

Thats correct. Its still a grey area.
In our case, they settled before going to court, based on the likeliness we'd win. I also am not aware of any case that did not hold up, based on the fact that the spectrum used was unlicensed spectrum. In all cases that didn't hold, there was some other deficiency that caused it not to hold up. Technicalities like unclearly written contracts or definitions. When attempting to license unlicense spectrum, there are many approaches to do it. There is a subtle difference, but its a big difference, in what ways will hold up or not.

FCC rules can't be prejudice between providers of broadband. But it doesn't define unlicensed spectrum as "broadband". The spectrum could be used for any of many purposes. So the rules don't apply. Until they expand OTARD to include shared common area controled by property owners, licensing the exclusive use of unlicensed spectrum from their controlled areas will in fact hold. Of course I can't prove it without going to court. Obviously I can't share detailed information pertaining to our case and agreement, as that would not bewise, as some day I may need to defend our agreements in court. All I can tell you, is if that day comes, we are well prepared to defend our case, and plan to win it.

Now you could find a tenant on the 24th floor of the building, and put an AP in their window, and with their permission be able to broadcast, and the landlord or WISP with exclusive rights wouldn't be able to do anything about it. When there is a will there is a way. The point is how much hassle is it, how fast can you move, and which way offers the best overall value proposition. If I can broadcast from the roof, and get 10 extra DBs on a links, to survive interference better, its worth paying for and worth having.

There was a company that had a similar contract on the BOA tower in
seattle that tried using this without any success as well, when I was
with another firm a few years back. Reality is there is no exclusive
rights to bands within unlicensed. ( my 2 cents)

I fully disagree. You don't license unlicensed spectrum. You license the right to operate equipment of a specific type from the property controlled by property owner. You can't control what spectrum is in the air, but an agreement can clearly control who has the right to put something on a roof and of what type. The landlords won that battle years ago, battling Teligent.

And if for any reason I'm wrong, which I'm not, the right agreement would still result in ability to get injunctive relief, until the issue made it through court for a final ruling. Easilly able to keep it tied up in court for years, accomplishing the same benefit to keep the competition from using your broadcast sites, for a long period of time, while you install customers and the opportunity passes them by.

There were a number of ISPs that thought, they'd move into my markets, to deploy Wireless. As you will see, not any of them that tried, are still in my markets. They learned it didn't do any good to have wireless gear deployed from the wrong places. Broadcast site was everything, to get coverage. If you didn't ahve coverage, marketing didn't work and sales people got pissed off and quit. I'm banking that my agreements will hold, and I am confident it is what is going to make the biggest difference in me getting the buy out terms, that I am holding out for, when the day comes that I sell. When someone can't steal your assets, they either go away, or they buy them (the assets). When someone controls the market to some extent through a unique asset, it can easilly double their worth. If it went to court, you bet that the Property owners would lobby hard to also protect the right, that they've fought so hard to keep the right to control whats on their roof over the years. Because they resell that right to people like me, and make a small fortune off it. They clearly have made a lot more off my business than I have :-)

I'd argue, that it would be worth a couple million (at the right time) to buy me out, even if I didn't include one customer in the sale, based on the fact that I have so many prime locations under contract, that could speed deployment, and by default is creating a ton of intererence, chewing up spectrum, for anyone trying to deploy new in my areas. I'm not attentially doing so (creating interference), I deploy in a way to optimally try to avoid causing interference, I just have deployed a lot of prime sites deployed to expand my network, to optimize my change to have LOS to my customers..

My point is it doesn't matter wether the agreements will hold up in court. Because they exist, and it needs to be proven that they wouldn't hold up in court, before they can be gotten around, and it will cost someone a lot less money to buy me, than to battle me in court, after considering their lost market share and time to market if they really wanted to succeed in my market, not to consider the added benefit of taking over my revenue from my customers. One of the best thing that I've done that I feel will help my success, is I've negotiated the best spectrum rights and agreements that I could negotiate. In the long run, I think it will pay off. I advise veryone to get smart about their agreements. It also benefits the buyer, knowingthat the assets they will buy are protected. It prevents the property owners (landlords) from raising the rent when the VC funded company tries to take over the space. I calculated it was worth buying me out for a couple million, just on the saving the Buyer would get over 5 years, based on the fact that I negotiated low rates during a down economy, compared to what they typically went for in an UP economy. With WiMax comming, and Telecom ACT flopping, I can tell you the demand for roof space will likely skyrocket. These long term methods of maximizing ROI, that occur at exit strategy time, will benefit those who are smart enough to plant the seeds early in their growth. Maybe the buyout never happens, and no ROI, but there is nothing to loose by writing the contracts to optimize the chances of maximum return. But what I can tell you is the quality of contractual agreement, are just as important of an asset as any other owned by a WISP, to include, revenue, customers, management teeam, equipment type, staff, intellectual property.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc


On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:23 -0600, "Dylan Oliver"
Huh. What's the difference between quasi and true exclusive rights? What
*would* hold up?

Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
WISPA Wireless List:



WISPA Wireless List:



Reply via email to