7 ms·

Small/TLDR backstory: Marriott jammed Wifi hotspots and offered its own internet services instead, charging from $250 per device. Source: http://www.slashgear.

by Tarang 12y ago

Small/TLDR backstory: Marriott jammed Wifi hotspots and offered its own internet services instead, charging from $250 per device. Source: http://www.slashgear.com/marriott-fined-600000-for-jamming-guest-hotspots-03349010/ http://www.slashgear.com/marriott-fined-600000-for-jamming-g...

geetee 12y ago
In addition to the $600,000 civil penalty, Marriott will have to cease blocking guests, hand over details of any access point containment features to the FCC across its entire portfolio of owned or managed properties, and finally file compliance and usage reports each quarter for the next three years. And how about refund everyone?
- smackfu 12y ago
  That would probably require a class action suit.
  - kirillzubovsky 12y ago
    Some lawyer somewhere is probably already calling up all and every Marriott guest on this planet.
    - riazrizvi 12y ago
      For the chance to make a couple of million in legal fees, do you blame them?
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      I had to support the IT functions of a corporate event at the Gaylord Opryland convention center ~18 months ago. Wouldn't mind joining a class action even if I don't see a dime after attempting to mitigate their wifi interference for a week.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - snowwrestler 12y ago
      The power of the class action suit is that you don't need to call everyone up. You just need a representative group of clients (which can be quite small) for standing, and evidence and justification to convince the judge to certify a class. Most folks are not aware they are in a class until they get a letter from the losing company with their $9 check or whatever is left over after lawyer's fees. Edit: forgot a word
- haspoken 12y ago
  The FCC thanks you for your generous contribution.
- aeturnum 12y ago
  Probably not within the powers of the FCC?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - eli 12y ago
    It was for exhibitors at the convention hall. That's actually very cheap so far as these things go. You should see what they charge for a trash can or a chair.
DannyBee 12y ago
FWIW: It appears as soon as marriot corporate discovered this, they ordered them not to do it again.
- coleca 12y ago
  FWIW I have seen this in practice at other convention centers (not owned by Marriott). We attended a convention (as an exhibitor) this year in MN and had to spend $10k for 3 days of Internet connectivity over WiFi. Your choices were to pay (this was the cheapest plan, others went much higher), or use your own. If they caught you using your own, they would block you and shut down your booth at the convention. Their rationale/justification was that because WiFi at scale (40k attendees, couple hundred exhibitors) the MiFis and other hotspots are using the bandwidth that the exhibitors have paid (a lot of money) for and caused issues with their demos (which the attendees paid entry fees to see). Convention centers operate in the world of unrealistically high pricing that is rarely seen outside of airport newsstands . For example, they wanted to charge us $3k for renting a 42" TV for 3 days. We ended up just buying a 27" Thunderbolt display and saved a ton (and had a nice monitor to give to one of our devs after the show).
  - AndyNemmity 12y ago
    I work conferences, and this is totally true about unrealistically high pricing. Although I've never seen paid WiFi... there's usually 2 sets, a public Wifi, and a Wifi for internal for demos.
    - nanidin 12y ago
      At CES, the company I worked for actually piped wireless signals directly from antenna to antenna with coax cable (or whatever it is that carries the signals from wifi) in order to reduce/eliminate the interference from thousands of other nearby devices.
  - ansible 12y ago
    Their rationale/justification was that because WiFi at scale (40k attendees, couple hundred exhibitors) the MiFis and other hotspots are using the bandwidth that the exhibitors have paid (a lot of money) for and caused issues with their demos (which the attendees paid entry fees to see). These high-end WiFi systems are expensive to install and administer. But that those prices they were charging, they've paid for the system in, like, the first day. Maybe by lunch time. Conference stuff in general is crazy.
Dylan16807 12y ago
And that story is apparently wrong if it was $250 per access point rental, not per device connected.
digikata 12y ago
On one hand, if it was jamming guest Wifi in hotel rooms it seems Marriott was acting badly. On the other hand, if this is in the context of trying to provision wifi for a conference, where there may be a lot of users packed into a dense space, I'm not so sure it's as bad. Wouldn't outside Wifi routers be fairly disruptive where you're maybe configuring individual conference service routers to lower their power -- to essentially get smaller than normal wifi range 'cells' and serve more users?
- wglb 12y ago
  I'm not so sure it's as bad. Completely illegal is not bad? Whatever the reason, this is bad.
  - djloche 12y ago
    There is a clear difference between the two.
- kstrauser 12y ago
  The problem is that the FCC says that you can't interfere with legally-operating radio systems. Since conference-goers' Wi-Fi hotspots are operated and licensed under FCC regulation, the hotel had no legal right to block them.
  - digikata 12y ago
    So legally Marriott was wrong, but from a technical implementation standpoint does this policy lead to fewer users being able to connect to Wifi at a conference? Are the regulations in this case meeting the end goal of the FCC - that good use is being made of the RF space?
    - kstrauser 12y ago
      You might be right, technically, but I'd much rather have the situation where no parties are allowed to interfere and manufacturers have incentive to develop sharing-friendly systems (spread spectrum, etc.), than the situation where entities can block my Internet access for their own convenience. Were that not the case, I could enter an arms race with my neighbors where we all compete for the strongest Wi-Fi blockers so that our own signal is strongest, perhaps to the point that one of us might get a business-class connection and start allowing paid access to it. "Too bad our block can't use Wi-Fi. Say, neighbor, for $100 a month I bet I could let you share mine."

by Tarang 12y ago

geetee 12y ago

In addition to the $600,000 civil penalty, Marriott will have to cease blocking guests, hand over details of any access point containment features to the FCC across its entire portfolio of owned or managed properties, and finally file compliance and usage reports each quarter for the next three years. And how about refund everyone?

smackfu 12y ago
That would probably require a class action suit.
- kirillzubovsky 12y ago
  Some lawyer somewhere is probably already calling up all and every Marriott guest on this planet.
  - riazrizvi 12y ago
    For the chance to make a couple of million in legal fees, do you blame them?
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    I had to support the IT functions of a corporate event at the Gaylord Opryland convention center ~18 months ago. Wouldn't mind joining a class action even if I don't see a dime after attempting to mitigate their wifi interference for a week.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - snowwrestler 12y ago
    The power of the class action suit is that you don't need to call everyone up. You just need a representative group of clients (which can be quite small) for standing, and evidence and justification to convince the judge to certify a class. Most folks are not aware they are in a class until they get a letter from the losing company with their $9 check or whatever is left over after lawyer's fees. Edit: forgot a word
haspoken 12y ago
The FCC thanks you for your generous contribution.
aeturnum 12y ago
Probably not within the powers of the FCC?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- eli 12y ago
  It was for exhibitors at the convention hall. That's actually very cheap so far as these things go. You should see what they charge for a trash can or a chair.

DannyBee 12y ago

FWIW: It appears as soon as marriot corporate discovered this, they ordered them not to do it again.

coleca 12y ago
FWIW I have seen this in practice at other convention centers (not owned by Marriott). We attended a convention (as an exhibitor) this year in MN and had to spend $10k for 3 days of Internet connectivity over WiFi. Your choices were to pay (this was the cheapest plan, others went much higher), or use your own. If they caught you using your own, they would block you and shut down your booth at the convention. Their rationale/justification was that because WiFi at scale (40k attendees, couple hundred exhibitors) the MiFis and other hotspots are using the bandwidth that the exhibitors have paid (a lot of money) for and caused issues with their demos (which the attendees paid entry fees to see). Convention centers operate in the world of unrealistically high pricing that is rarely seen outside of airport newsstands . For example, they wanted to charge us $3k for renting a 42" TV for 3 days. We ended up just buying a 27" Thunderbolt display and saved a ton (and had a nice monitor to give to one of our devs after the show).
- AndyNemmity 12y ago
  I work conferences, and this is totally true about unrealistically high pricing. Although I've never seen paid WiFi... there's usually 2 sets, a public Wifi, and a Wifi for internal for demos.
  - nanidin 12y ago
    At CES, the company I worked for actually piped wireless signals directly from antenna to antenna with coax cable (or whatever it is that carries the signals from wifi) in order to reduce/eliminate the interference from thousands of other nearby devices.
- ansible 12y ago
  Their rationale/justification was that because WiFi at scale (40k attendees, couple hundred exhibitors) the MiFis and other hotspots are using the bandwidth that the exhibitors have paid (a lot of money) for and caused issues with their demos (which the attendees paid entry fees to see). These high-end WiFi systems are expensive to install and administer. But that those prices they were charging, they've paid for the system in, like, the first day. Maybe by lunch time. Conference stuff in general is crazy.

Dylan16807 12y ago

And that story is apparently wrong if it was $250 per access point rental, not per device connected.

digikata 12y ago

On one hand, if it was jamming guest Wifi in hotel rooms it seems Marriott was acting badly. On the other hand, if this is in the context of trying to provision wifi for a conference, where there may be a lot of users packed into a dense space, I'm not so sure it's as bad. Wouldn't outside Wifi routers be fairly disruptive where you're maybe configuring individual conference service routers to lower their power -- to essentially get smaller than normal wifi range 'cells' and serve more users?

wglb 12y ago
I'm not so sure it's as bad. Completely illegal is not bad? Whatever the reason, this is bad.
- djloche 12y ago
  There is a clear difference between the two.
kstrauser 12y ago
The problem is that the FCC says that you can't interfere with legally-operating radio systems. Since conference-goers' Wi-Fi hotspots are operated and licensed under FCC regulation, the hotel had no legal right to block them.
- digikata 12y ago
  So legally Marriott was wrong, but from a technical implementation standpoint does this policy lead to fewer users being able to connect to Wifi at a conference? Are the regulations in this case meeting the end goal of the FCC - that good use is being made of the RF space?
  - kstrauser 12y ago
    You might be right, technically, but I'd much rather have the situation where no parties are allowed to interfere and manufacturers have incentive to develop sharing-friendly systems (spread spectrum, etc.), than the situation where entities can block my Internet access for their own convenience. Were that not the case, I could enter an arms race with my neighbors where we all compete for the strongest Wi-Fi blockers so that our own signal is strongest, perhaps to the point that one of us might get a business-class connection and start allowing paid access to it. "Too bad our block can't use Wi-Fi. Say, neighbor, for $100 a month I bet I could let you share mine."