On Metacritic: BioShock 2: Is it a disappointment?
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

August 5th, 2005

Who owns the air?

Posted by Dana Blankenhorn @ 11:56 am

Categories: General, Government, LANs and WANs, Legal

Tags:

Massport LogoUnlicensed frequencies are supposed to be open to anyone who puts in a device that conforms to regulations.

But what if your landlord says you can’t, because they want to sell access to the unlicensed frequency?

A court may have to decide this one. As Declan McCullagh reports, Logan Airport is trying to protect a paid WiFi monopoly contract it signed with a start-up called Advanced Wireless Group against the encroachment of a free WiFi hotspot installed at the Continental Air lounge.

Massport, which owns the real estate, sent Continental a letter claiming its radio threatened to jam frequencies used by police and security officials. That’s bogus, since its own paid service uses the same bands.

What’s really at stake here is whether real estate owners also control radio signals coming through their property. Continental has complained to the FCC, which opened a file on it, while Massport says the FCC has no jurisdiction, pointing to a lease agreement that prohibits changes to the space’s communication system without prior written approval.

This case extends far beyond Logan Airport, because Massport didn’t just "sell" the right to use unlicensed frequencies at Logan Airport. According to AWG, a joint-venture between a unit of sports agents IMG and a group called Electronic Media Systems, Inc. whose ownership I can’t immediately identify:

Going forward, Massport may extend the Wi-Fi service to encompass all of the Massport property, including, the USS Constitution Marina, the East Boston Waterfront, and the South Boston Complex that includes the Boston World Trade Center.

Is that legal? I can easily imagine private apartment complexes and commercial structures using such language to keep WiFi out, then selling the "right" to "sell" such service to someone else. In fact this is precisely what Massport has done.

Thus do the vagaries of real estate and communications law collide. This won’t be the last such case. I hope one makes it to court soon, so we know whether open source communication is a right of the people, controlled by the federal government, or a property right real estate owners can transfer, based on local contract law.

Dana BlankenhornDana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983. You can follow Dana on Twitter. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.

Email Dana Blankenhorn

Subscribe to Linux and Open Source via Email alerts or RSS.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 6 Talkback(s)
We the People
By virtue of the Interstate Commerce Clause and the Federal Communication Act 0f 1934 et Al.
A) Unlicensed is wrong since all of the devices are 'device licensed' as required by the applicable Fed... (Read the rest)
Posted by: plumley@... Posted on: 08/08/05 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
What has open source to do with it?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/05/05
Weeellllll  quietLee | 08/05/05
Not a thing  John L. Ries | 08/05/05
mis-reading the title  zzz1234567890 | 08/05/05
From the body of the article...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 08/06/05
We the People  plumley@... | 08/08/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

Recent Entries

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here