<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Federal agency recommends killing LightSquared LTE plans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 04:40:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Fitchard</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-796284</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Fitchard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 04:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-796284</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Donald,

I would disagree. The public, you and I, own those frequencies. LightSquared owns a license to use those frequencies. I think that&#039;s a critical difference, since it implies that LS doesn&#039;t have carte blanche to use them anyway it sees fit.

That said, you&#039;re definitely right about the issue of receiver design. GPS device makers built their receivers under the assumption that no high-powered signals would ever be in that band (which was not an unreasonable assumption at the time). They, however, continued to design their receivers that way even after they learned that the use of the L-band would change. They claim that they had no idea, but the military and the cellular industry changed up their design.

So back Seth&#039;s point, maybe LS does have a lawsuit on its hands -- against Trimble, John Deere and the rest of the commercial GPS industry. Not sure it would succeed, but there&#039;s definitely a case.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Donald,</p>
<p>I would disagree. The public, you and I, own those frequencies. LightSquared owns a license to use those frequencies. I think that&#8217;s a critical difference, since it implies that LS doesn&#8217;t have carte blanche to use them anyway it sees fit.</p>
<p>That said, you&#8217;re definitely right about the issue of receiver design. GPS device makers built their receivers under the assumption that no high-powered signals would ever be in that band (which was not an unreasonable assumption at the time). They, however, continued to design their receivers that way even after they learned that the use of the L-band would change. They claim that they had no idea, but the military and the cellular industry changed up their design.</p>
<p>So back Seth&#8217;s point, maybe LS does have a lawsuit on its hands &#8212; against Trimble, John Deere and the rest of the commercial GPS industry. Not sure it would succeed, but there&#8217;s definitely a case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Bates</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-796265</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Bates]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-796265</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LS DOES own the frequencies in question.  They just happen to be adjacent to the L1 GPS frequency.  Since nothing has been adjacent to that band for some time, GPS makers have been getting away with using badly designed filters which accept a much large window than they should.  The cost to redesign the filters is cheap, but it also means obsolescence for most GPS in the hands of consumers today.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LS DOES own the frequencies in question.  They just happen to be adjacent to the L1 GPS frequency.  Since nothing has been adjacent to that band for some time, GPS makers have been getting away with using badly designed filters which accept a much large window than they should.  The cost to redesign the filters is cheap, but it also means obsolescence for most GPS in the hands of consumers today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Fitchard</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-796177</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Fitchard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 19:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-796177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Bob,

You mean rescind LightSquared&#039;s terrestrial network waiver? Yep, I&#039;m sure that&#039;s exactly what the FCC will do, though LS will be able to keep its satellite spectrum. I&#039;m sure the GPS industry would like LS to continue operator that satellite network as well since high-precision receivers actually use its satellites for within-the-meter location. Oh the irony... :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Bob,</p>
<p>You mean rescind LightSquared&#8217;s terrestrial network waiver? Yep, I&#8217;m sure that&#8217;s exactly what the FCC will do, though LS will be able to keep its satellite spectrum. I&#8217;m sure the GPS industry would like LS to continue operator that satellite network as well since high-precision receivers actually use its satellites for within-the-meter location. Oh the irony&#8230; :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Fitchard</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-796176</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Fitchard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 19:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-796176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Seth, 

I see why you would say that but I think you may not have all of the information. LS doesn&#039;t own spectrum it can do whatever it wants with in the sense you are I own property. It bought a license from the FCC to use the 1.6 GHz frequencies for satellite use. The terms of their license states it has to be used for that purpose only, just like a TV broadcaster can&#039;t suddenly start using its airwaves for Wi-Fi.

LS asked the government for a series of waivers that would allow it to change its license terms, in other words deploy a terrestrial LTE network. The FCC granted those waivers but only on the condition that the network deployed would not interfere with GPS, but interference looks exactly to be the case.

So LS didn&#039;t really pay for a mobile broadband  license. In fact it skirted the multi-billion cost of such of license since satellite-use licenses have only a fraction of the value of terrestrial network ones. Philip Falcone took a big gamble, which could have paid off huge if he won, but that doesn&#039;t appear to be the case.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Seth, </p>
<p>I see why you would say that but I think you may not have all of the information. LS doesn&#8217;t own spectrum it can do whatever it wants with in the sense you are I own property. It bought a license from the FCC to use the 1.6 GHz frequencies for satellite use. The terms of their license states it has to be used for that purpose only, just like a TV broadcaster can&#8217;t suddenly start using its airwaves for Wi-Fi.</p>
<p>LS asked the government for a series of waivers that would allow it to change its license terms, in other words deploy a terrestrial LTE network. The FCC granted those waivers but only on the condition that the network deployed would not interfere with GPS, but interference looks exactly to be the case.</p>
<p>So LS didn&#8217;t really pay for a mobile broadband  license. In fact it skirted the multi-billion cost of such of license since satellite-use licenses have only a fraction of the value of terrestrial network ones. Philip Falcone took a big gamble, which could have paid off huge if he won, but that doesn&#8217;t appear to be the case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-795825</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 04:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-795825</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lightsquared like any other company has the right to go bankrupt for making a bad investment and engineering mistake.  Yes, the gps may actually bleed into lightsquared&#039;s bandwidth.  The FCC just simply needs to rescind lightsquared&#039;s license.  Mistake made by trying to use too narrow a bandwidth spacing. Learn from it and go on, it is not the first time a governmental error has cost people money!  Won&#039;t be the last.  Yes, I live in an area that would have benefitted greatly by lightsquaed&#039;s technology.  I also have wireless microphones that are not o be used due to the governments bandwidth changes.  If Lightsquared has a right to make money on their investment, then I have a right to have the government pay me original retail and take this microphone system off my hands.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lightsquared like any other company has the right to go bankrupt for making a bad investment and engineering mistake.  Yes, the gps may actually bleed into lightsquared&#8217;s bandwidth.  The FCC just simply needs to rescind lightsquared&#8217;s license.  Mistake made by trying to use too narrow a bandwidth spacing. Learn from it and go on, it is not the first time a governmental error has cost people money!  Won&#8217;t be the last.  Yes, I live in an area that would have benefitted greatly by lightsquaed&#8217;s technology.  I also have wireless microphones that are not o be used due to the governments bandwidth changes.  If Lightsquared has a right to make money on their investment, then I have a right to have the government pay me original retail and take this microphone system off my hands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Cathey</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-795806</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Cathey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 03:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-795806</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The ol&#039; Potomac two-step...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ol&#8217; Potomac two-step&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-795795</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 03:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-795795</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Poor LS, They should read there licenses better next time... it says &quot;terrestrial service in the L-Band spectrum&quot;... It&#039;s time for LS to fold.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Poor LS, They should read there licenses better next time&#8230; it says &#8220;terrestrial service in the L-Band spectrum&#8221;&#8230; It&#8217;s time for LS to fold.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Seth</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/01/13/federal-agency-recommends-killing-lightsquared-lte-plans/#comment-795784</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Seth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2012 02:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=470653#comment-795784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is getting ridiculous- LS needs to just bust out the lawyers and sue the FCC.. It&#039;s really ridiculous that they were sold spectrum and are now being told they can&#039;t use what they paid for. If there really is a huge GPS / interference problem, then either the FCC needs to tell everyone else to get off the spectrum, or they need to pay up and give LS a full refund or another block of spectrum they can use.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is getting ridiculous- LS needs to just bust out the lawyers and sue the FCC.. It&#8217;s really ridiculous that they were sold spectrum and are now being told they can&#8217;t use what they paid for. If there really is a huge GPS / interference problem, then either the FCC needs to tell everyone else to get off the spectrum, or they need to pay up and give LS a full refund or another block of spectrum they can use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
