Seminar o politici radio-frekvencijskog spektra u

Srbiji

Workshop on Radio Spectrum Management in Serbia

7-8 November 2006 Belgrade

ROBERT HORVITZOpen Spectrum Foundation

AGENDAAGENDA

Evolution of radio regulation

Licensed/license-exempt

Critique of traditional spectrum management and the search for alternatives

Spectrum access rights continuum

COFFEE

Optical TelegraphOptical TelegraphIntercity networks of manned signalling towers built in France, Germany, England, Sweden, Norway, Spain, etc., (1793-1840)

– To relay current intelligence & urgent orders

– Expensive but of great value to military, police, diplomats

– Helped extend & consolidate government influence

Optical TelegraphOptical TelegraphA Government/Military monopoly

“National security asset”– Like Post Office, but Government the main –

or only - user– Use by private citizens limited by law or

cost

Fortunately, 19th century Governments did not declare the visible spectrum to be a “scarce natural resource” that must be controlled by the State to protect optical telegraph communications.

Ofcom Spectrum Efficiency Ofcom Spectrum Efficiency Scheme Technical StudyScheme Technical Study

Higher Frequency bands for Licence Exempt Applications– Contract awarded to Quotient Associates

Ltd.

"A key outcome from this study is to answer the question as to whether all spectrum above a particular frequency should be licence-exempt and if so, what this frequency should be...

“End date: December 2006"

Final Report of the FCC Spectrum Final Report of the FCC Spectrum Policy Task Force’s Unlicensed Devices Policy Task Force’s Unlicensed Devices

and Experimental Licenses Working and Experimental Licenses Working GroupGroup, 2002:, 2002:

[Above 30 GHz] “the physics of this band are so different than lower bands as to bring into question most of the fundamental precepts of radio regulation... While licensing is the general presumption at lower frequencies, the physics of these frequencies appear to justify a de novo approach... It may well be reasonable to question whether unlicensed use should be a major type of use in these higher bands, rather than one restricted to a small set of bands...”

Optical TelegraphOptical Telegraph

Inspired Samuel F. B. MorseInfluenced European

governments’ attitudes toward the Electric Telegraph, which were inherited by Telephony and Wireless Telegraphy (Radio)

Electric TelegraphElectric TelegraphGovernment monopolies all over Europe

– Post Office model– No foreign ownership allowed– Morse excluded even where he had the patent

Morse himself favored government monopoly– Offered US Post Office exclusive right to create

a national network– Postmaster General said no

• His assessment: telegraphy could never be profitable “under any rate of postage”

So Congress rejected Morse’s offer

From Telegraphy to From Telegraphy to TelephonyTelephony

Regulation began at international level, with a 1849 treaty between Austria & Prussia

1865: mesh of bilateral and regional treaties combined to create the International Telegraph Union.

1885: Telegraph Union treaty amended to include international telephony– National autonomy in arrangements for

domestic telephony

Contrary to popular belief...Contrary to popular belief...

First motive for regulating radio was not to prevent overuse of a limited resource

First motives were to:– Change the service conditions imposed by

“dominant market power” Marconi– Improve the safety of life and property at sea– Establish government authority to license ship

radios operating outside national territory

Preventing interference a secondary issue

Before Bill Gates, there was Before Bill Gates, there was Guglielmo MarconiGuglielmo Marconi

Marconi Wireless Telegraph Co. Ltd. would not sell equipment or intercommunicate– Service contract required all messages to be

sent and received only by their employees

Special relationship with British Government– To expand British naval & undersea cable

dominance?

– Transoceanic communication crucial to every country’s markets, colonial ambitions

Radiotelegraphic Radiotelegraphic Convention Convention

of 1906of 1906

Coastal and shipboard stations required “to exchange radiograms without distinction of the radio system adopted...”

– 9 of the 27 countries signing the Convention added this reservation:• Intercommunication not required in

countries with at least one station which accepted all messages

Radiotelegraphic Radiotelegraphic Convention Convention

of 1906of 1906“No station on shipboard shall be established or

worked by private enterprise without authority from the Government to which the vessel is subject. Such authority shall be in the nature of a license issued by said Government.”

Coastal stations handling “public correspondence” must be licensed, but Governments “preserve their entire liberty” with regard to licensing other types of stations.

Radiotelegraphic Radiotelegraphic Convention Convention

of 1906of 1906

Government stations generally exempt from the provisions of Convention

– except for rules about minimizing interference & responding to radio calls for help

Radiotelegraphic Radiotelegraphic Convention Convention

of 1906 – of 1906 – and 2006?and 2006?“The choice of wireless apparatus and

devices to be used by the coastal stations and stations on shipboard shall be unrestricted. The installation of such stations shall as far as possible keep pace with scientific and technical progress...

“The working of the wireless telegraph stations shall be organized as far as possible in such manner as not to disturb the service of other wireless stations...”

Radio inherited...Radio inherited...

From Telegraphy:– Treatment as a “national asset”– Tradition of government control

From Telephony:– Principle of “national autonomy” in

domestic implementations

ITU-R Regulation S18.1ITU-R Regulation S18.1

"No transmitting station may be established or operated by a private person or by any enterprise without a license issued in an appropriate form and in conformity with the provisions of these Regulations by or on behalf of the government of the country to which the station in question is subject."

Exemption from licensing does not

mean exemption from regulation!

Global market for SRDsGlobal market for SRDs

“Collective Use of Spectrum” Consortium

ITU Global Symposium for ITU Global Symposium for Regulators (2004)Regulators (2004)

"We further encourage innovative approaches to managing the spectrum resource such as the ability to share spectrum or allocating on a license-exempt non-interference basis... We recommend that regulators carefully consider how to minimize licensing hurdles..."

---Best Practice Guidelines for the Promotion of Low Cost Broadband and Internet Connectivity

Trends in Telecommunication Trends in Telecommunication Reform: Licensing in an Era of Reform: Licensing in an Era of

ConvergenceConvergence (ITU, 2004)(ITU, 2004)

"...more and more policy-makers are questioning the utility of licensing and demanding that licences be adapted to achieve policy goals without hindering market development... The allocation of spectrum for licence-exempt use is increasingly viewed as a catalyst for the development of more efficient and cost-effective wireless technologies. By late 2004, 55 countries had allocated spectrum for unlicensed use..."

EC Authorization Directive EC Authorization Directive (2002)(2002)

“The least onerous authorisation system possible should be used to allow the provision of electronic communications...”

“General authorization” the preferred option

“Individual license” only when “unavoidable” and “objectively justified”

De-licensing Maritime De-licensing Maritime MobileMobile

Denmark: gradually since 1997

Sweden: VHF use by private boats since 2006

Netherlands: de-licensing “some” radio equipment in “near future”

UK: proposed, but postponed

Australia, New Zealand, USA - already

Serbia’s Telecom LawSerbia’s Telecom Law

License tenders - but no trading or transfers– “The presence of secondary markets

makes it more profitable for licensees to be spectrum efficient...”

“Rational... Efficient... Economical...”

What do these mean in practice?

Spectrum EconomicsSpectrum Economics

Is radio a “public good”– like sunlight or air?

Is radio a “commodity”

– like wire or water?

What’s wrong with What’s wrong with traditional spectrum traditional spectrum

management?management?RIGID

– Good in times of slow change– Inefficient in times of fast change

CONSERVATIVE– Good in times of frequency abundance– Costly in times of frequency shortage

Blocks new approaches to band-sharing – Underlays, Overlays, Ultra-Wideband

Cost of Cost of mismis-allocating -allocating spectrumspectrum

Estimated loss to US economy:

$77 billion per year

in higher operating costs and delayed/forbidden/unrealized wireless

services

$77 billion is 260 times the FCC’s annual budget...

(but only 0.6% of US Gross Domestic Product)

US Radio Spectrum US Radio Spectrum Occupancy Measurements, Occupancy Measurements,

1990-20041990-2004

“Multi-Band, Multi-Location Spectrum Occupancy Measurements” by Mark A. McHenry and Dan McCloskey (ISART,

2006)

Another Way?Another Way?

1. Licensed access

2. License-free access

3. A “continuum” of access rights

- based on device performance “scorecard”

(Can performance-based access rights

co-exist with paid entry?)

Robert Horvitzbob@openspectrum.info

OPEN SPECTRUM FOUNDATION

Amsterdam/Praguehttp://www.openspectrum.info/