Cable’s concerns have been based solely on technical issues. Cable has been very patient in this process, extending over several years. We first raised our technical concerns at the FCC in the white spaces proceeding four years ago. At the same time we have reached out continuously to the white spaces proponents for constructive solutions. In 2007, we submitted a detailed technical study which described our interference concerns.

The important thing to keep in mind here is that cable has no white spaces. While various proposals and ex parte advocacy filings have been submitted in this proceeding, none have addressed the implications of TV band devices operating on the same frequencies used by cable. None have focused on the potential disruption of customer viewing of cable programming. 

This inattention has persevered despite detailed filings by NCTA demonstrating the high likelihood that unlicensed personal/portable TV band devices, as currently proposed, will interfere with cable service. The Commission’s own findings in lab tests a year ago confirmed the serious risks of “direct pickup” (DPU) interference to cable-ready DTV receivers. Now, early reports of Commission field tests further demonstrate that the risk to cable consumers is very real. 

A second problem is the high risk of interference to rural cable headend antenna reception. Cable systems in rural communities often rely on tower-mounted, high gain directional antennas to receive broadcast signals. Many of these headend sites are outside the station’s predicted Grade B contour. 

NCTA has urged the Commission to take full account of the unique hazards to cable before it approves unlicensed transmitters on TV white spaces frequencies.

We think this is a straightforward problem that needs to be addressed. We continue to support efforts to open up additional spectrum for the delivery of new wireless communications. However, the customers we serve have every right to expect this to be fixed before that happens.

In the future, I would invite you to contact us for clarification before posting something that is simply not accurate.

Sincerely,

William Check
Senior Vice President for Science & Technology
NCTA

As a technology publication, don’t you have a responsibility to report accurately the pros and cons of the technology?

As you mention, Cable has good reason to explore wireless, but you then discount that and argue that we would neutralize a potentially lucrative technology.

We welcome the competition that white space devices would bring, but not at the detriment of the services to which our customers subscribe.