4 ms·
Unfortunately that's not a very good argument on its own. Wifi exists in the unlicensed bands in the US and is thus subject to FCC title 47, part 15 rules. This
by kec 11y ago
Unfortunately that's not a very good argument on its own. Wifi exists in the unlicensed bands in the US and is thus subject to FCC title 47, part 15 rules. This includes the provision that the onus is on the unlicensed transmitter (in this case your wifi device) to gracefully deal with any interference it might encounter.
- granos 11y agoAt the same time (from the article): 47 U.S. Code § 333 - Willful or malicious interference No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this chapter or operated by the United States Government. This puts some responsibility on the LTE operator to not stomp on WiFi.
- scintill76 11y agoAlso, "The FCC has already said that Section 333 applies to unlicensed spectrum by prohibiting Wi-Fi jamming." http://www.wetmachine.com/tales-of-the-sausage-factory/my-insanely-long-field-guide-to-the-lteu-dust-up-part-ii-a-storm-of-spectrum-swords/ http://www.wetmachine.com/tales-of-the-sausage-factory/my-in...
- kec 11y agoWhile IANAL, the key word there seems to be "malicious". Merely operating in the same band doesn't show any malicious intent, even if it severely degrades performance for other devices in the band. Jammers on the other hand do intrinsically show malicious intent because they operate in a way which serves no purpose other than denial of service for other local transmitters.