Seeking Spectrum Flexibility, LPTV Advocates Take Their Media Bureau Beef Public
LPTV advocates seeking to test a different broadcast technology that would let stations offer TV and broadband services simultaneously have been “blocked” from meeting with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski by Media Bureau Staff, SpectrumEvolution CEO Greg Herman wrote in an open letter to the chairman. The group’s application for an experimental license to test the technology in Portland, Ore., has been similarly blocked, he said. The application poses no interference to other licensees, he said. “Nothing could be more routine! Yet the Media and Wireless Bureaus and the Office of Engineering and Technology seem all to feel they must intercede.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The group decided to take its beef public after repeatedly failing to make headway through typical channels, said broadcast lawyer Peter Tannenwald of Fletcher Heald, counsel to Herman. “Nobody wants to have to fight it out in an open, public battle, but we've failed in every other attempt,” Tannenwald said. “It’s difficult to get to see the chairman, but we have asked for help in arranging such a meeting and we were told, ‘No.'” A Media Bureau spokeswoman declined to comment on the letter, which was sent Thursday.
"Why we're at war is, there is clearly skepticism that we can do this, and we want to prove it, but they're not going to let us,” Tannenwald said. The group wants permission to use a Chinese-developed broadcast technology called China Mobile Multimedia Broadcasting, rather than the U.S. standard ASTC DTV technology, at a 5-cell installation in Portland, he said. The group has also met with industry officials from NAB and the Association for Maximum Service TV, he said. “We are reviewing the letter and the proposed technology,” an NAB spokesman said. “NAB has taken no position on the experimental license proposal."
It’s unusual to see an advocacy group or company throw its hands up so publicly this early in its regulatory campaign, said Harold Feld, legal director for Public Knowledge. “I've sometimes seen it when people get frustrated, but these guys have not been around all that long,” he said. “The delays we're talking about here are not so ridiculous that they raise eyebrows.” Typically, groups that struggle to get meetings with commissioners or action on a bureau-level decision may turn to their congressional representative to write a letter and spur activity, Feld said. “It’s unfortunate and I understand they're feeling that they are up against the clock, but I was sort of surprised when I saw this that they were making this kind of fuss now."
Small companies shouldn’t be disadvantaged when seeking time with FCC officials or permission to innovate, Herman wrote in the letter to Genachowski. “Please stop the Commission Staff from insulating you from supportive and factual input to your decision process,” Herman wrote, seeking a meeting later this month.