The FCC approved revisions to its 2013 technical rules for signal boosters, providing relief sought by Wi-Ex on rules for the testing and certification of wideband consumer signal boosters. The FCC also sought further comment in docket 10-4 on a single issue in the order and Further NPRM (http://bit.ly/Y34b0K), released Monday. Wi-Ex, which sells boosters, had complained in a petition seeking reconsideration that testing procedures to certify wideband boosters were complicated by the need for special test equipment to determine whether the device complies with the downlink noise limit in the rules. Wi-Ex told the FCC that during the course of meetings with the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology and the ANSI ASC C63 working group “it was determined that filtering equipment that includes variable tunable bandpass filtering and notches was necessary to measure the downlink noise in the presence of downlink signals through the booster,” the order said. But the OET lab and other labs that test communications equipment “do not have such equipment, thus complicating device testing,” the FCC said. “We agree ... and find that the requested amendments to our rules will facilitate the test procedures and equipment certification process for Wideband Consumer Signal Boosters without diminishing the safeguards in our rules designed to protect wireless networks.” The FCC approved a handful of changes sought by V-Comm, Verizon and Wilson Electronics in a second petition. Among them, the FCC approved new noise and gain limits for provider-specific consumer signal boosters. The commission accepted a recommendation that “the maximum booster gain not exceed 58 dB and 65 dB for frequencies below and above 1 GHz, respectively.” The FCC said the limits are “reasonable for signal booster manufacturers to implement, while also adequately protecting against interference to wireless networks.” The FCC also adopted, at the joint petitioners’ request, a requirement that provider-specific boosters “must be sold together with antennas, cables, and/or coupling devices that meet the requirements of this section” of FCC rules. The FCC also adopted a requirement that all consumer signal boosters certified for fixed, in-building operation include a label directing consumers that the device may only be operated in a fixed, in-building location. “We agree that such a requirement is appropriate to ensure that consumers are properly informed about which devices are suitable for their use and how to comply with our rules,” the FCC said. The FNPRM tees up a single issue -- should the FCC eliminate the “personal use” restriction for provider-specific consumer signal boosters. “Would removing this restriction for Provider-Specific Consumer Signal Boosters be in the public interest?” the FCC asks. “What are the costs and benefits of removing the restriction? What are the costs and benefits of maintaining the restriction?” Comments will be due 30 days after the notice appears in the Federal Register and reply comments 20 days later.
The FCC should “do nothing” that would upset the balance struck in the 2010 Open Internet order, which “balanced concerns about Internet openness with the need to maintain incentives for Internet service providers to continue investing in advanced networks,” AT&T said. The commission has “ample statutory authority under section 706 to adopt new rules that replicate the balance struck in 2010” including new no-blocking and nondiscrimination rules, it said: The record is “devoid of evidence of any actual threat to Internet openness that could possibly warrant heavy-handed regulation, and any such rules would be” highly vulnerable to legal challenge. “And if there is one thing that all parties to this proceeding can agree on, it is that the Commission should ground its rules on a solid legal foundation to avoid the turmoil and investment-deterring uncertainty that would follow yet another judicial remand,” it said.
The government’s surveillance of foreigners outside the U.S. is legal, valuable, subject to oversight and is not a bulk collection program, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) decided unanimously in a report released Tuesday (http://bit.ly/1pJz0EA). Although the board did identify several privacy concerns about the program’s use and collection of American citizens’ private information, suggesting various reforms in the process, board member Elisebeth Collins Cook, a Wilmer Hale lawyer, said the concerns were “not driven by a concern that U.S. persons’ rights are being violated.” PCLOB voted to make the report official Wednesday.
The Department of Commerce will ramp up staffing in coming weeks to better administer the U.S.-EU safe-harbor agreement, including a website redesign with different sections tailored for European Union consumers and companies, said Ted Dean, deputy assistant secretary for services at Commerce’s International Trade Administration, which administers the safe harbor program. The FTC developed its own website to highlight its safe-harbor enforcement actions -- over half of which have occurred in 2014 -- said FTC Consumer Protection Bureau Director Jessica Rich. Both officials spoke at a Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue event Tuesday on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
For the second time in four years, the FCC failed to convince the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that it had authority to impose net neutrality rules on broadband ISPs. The anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules in the agency’s December 2010 net neutrality order were indistinguishable from prohibited common carrier restrictions, said the decision (http://1.usa.gov/1m0UQPi). Chairman Tom Wheeler’s FCC has already faced renewed calls to reclassify broadband Internet as a Title II service.
Accounts of the status of a long-awaited surveillance bill differed drastically last week, with top Republicans suggesting the bill may hit the House floor in 2014 while a Democrat declared it dead. Don’t expect any major House Intelligence Committee surveillance proposals any time soon, a Democratic committee member told us. House Republican leadership killed an overhaul the committee was developing, choosing instead to defer to the House Judiciary Committee, where the more “aggressive” USA Freedom Act is under consideration, said Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn. The Intelligence and Judiciary committees share jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). But Republicans have pushed back against this idea and insisted the bill will be alive and well in 2014.
President Barack Obama suggested the U.S. might be able to accomplish its intelligence goals by other means than the Patriot Act Section 215 phone metadata surveillance, he told reporters at a news conference Friday before leaving for Hawaii. He had received 46 recommendations from a five-member review group he appointed on Wednesday (CD Dec 19 p4) -- recommendations that criticized the efficacy of the National Security Agency program, urged industry or a third party to hold the metadata and to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to allow for a public advocate, among other changes. AT&T, meanwhile, followed Verizon’s lead (CD Dec 20 p1) and said it will also post transparency reports.
Hill pressure on the idea of cellphone conversation on airplanes while in-flight escalated Thursday as all five FCC commissioners faced the House Communications Subcommittee, hours before the agency took up an item to propose allowing such conversation from a technical perspective (see separate report in this issue). At the hearing, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler defended the proposal and said he’s talked with others in government about what will happen next. Members of both houses of Congress have raised the controversial issue, and the U.S. Department of Transportation is kicking off a process that may ban voice calls on planes, officials said.
While the IP transition could see action first, the incentive auction of broadcast TV spectrum remains one of the highest priorities for FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, a senior commission official said Wednesday. The auction remains the single issue on which Wheeler is spending the most time, the official said. Some industry observers feared a slight pivot on Wheeler’s part in recent days, highlighted by last Thursday’s blog post promising action in January on the transition (CD Nov 30 p1).
The insufficient enforcement of International Trade Commission exclusion orders is generating a spike in congressional and industry criticism directed at the ITC and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), said industry representatives in recent interviews. They said there are no immediately available options to improve the ITC and CBP exclusion order proceedings that industry maligns as costly and drawn out. Problems include opaque CBP enforcement proceedings, overly broad exclusion order language and inadequate CBP enforcement resources, industry lawyers said. Despite the criticism from Capitol Hill, there appears to be little hope of a legislative solution, said industry lawyers.