I agree with you that the FCC may have made a mistake here although
their intentions are correct. At the same time though, I think you may
be overreacting. Remember that the FCC's regulations are only one factor
to consider. Take part 15 for example... We all know what the FCC's
regulations are, yet often contract law is able to trump them. Certainly
anyone who has entered into lease agreements with the major tower/roof
companies understands how their lease protects them from other
operators. I see these leases applying the same effects with 3.65Ghz.
Much in the same way with 5Ghz, companies like ours will seek to lock up
spectrum through contracts as opposed to licenses.
-Matt
Patrick Leary wrote:
I was expecting to be excited about it to John, but the FCC took a wrong
term not with the lite-licensing part, but with the mandating HUMAN
cooperation. They should have stuck to the original plan of mandating
only EQUIPMENT cooperation. The human part is broken before it even
starts -- you cannot have a rule that says you must make an agreement
with another party when the same rule tells you you have to scrap that
agreement and start over when the next person comes along.
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
