Don't expand space operations in the 2110-2120 MHz portion of the AWS-1 band, wireless interests urged the FCC this week in docket 13-115 reply comments. The agency in September adopted a Further NPRM proposing changes to the Table of Frequency Allocations addressing the use of spectrum by manned and unmanned spacecraft during missions, and seeking comment on new spectrum allocations in certain bands for communications with cargo and crew capsules. Wireless providers have relied on the 2110-2120 MHz band for their networks, and the proposed expansion of satellite uplinks in the band ignores that it was auctioned and licensed to commercial wireless operators subject only to interference from one federal user at one location in California, CTIA said. Expanded use outside of NASA's Deep Space Network research facility would undermine wireless licensees' "investment-backed expectations in acquiring [licenses] and foundational network deployment," it said. CTIA said minus the protections that come with exclusive use licenses, consumers could face service-quality disruptions and there would be less confidence in the auction and regulatory process. AT&T said its use of the 2110-2120 MHz spectrum is constrained only by the need to accept interference from those high-power NASA transmitters. It said additional restrictions on AWS-1 A-Block licensees’ use of the 2110-2120 MHz portion of the band would undermine the auction process and put new terms on licensees post auction. Such a move would also put AWS-1 A-Block licensees at a competitive disadvantage to other AWS-1 licensees, it said. More nonfederal spectrum allocations for launch activities will help relieve lower S-band congestion, SpaceX said. It urged streamlined coordination in the upper S band as a way of supporting launch and space operations while protecting incumbent flight-testing services. It pushed for looking beyond the S and L bands for spectrum for launch and space operations, including for commercial crewed and uncrewed spacecraft. In a separate filing, SpaceX and fellow crewed launch capability companies Vast Space, Sierra Space, Voyager Space Holdings and Starlab Space urged the FCC to make an allocation for future crewed space stations and operations not connected to the International Space Station, which is to be retired in 2030. They said additional bands should be considered for space-to-space communications. The Aerospace and Flight Test Radio Coordinating Council said that before there are any changes to the L and upper S bands, the FCC, NTIA, DOD and the space launch industry should get more experience with the lower S bands being available for nationwide licensing on a secondary basis. It said the FCC also should monitor commercial launch operators' use of the L and upper S bands under the existing framework.

The American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research (ACI) urged the FCC against reclassifying broadband as a Communications Act Title II telecom service. Reclassification would "lead to a decline in consumer welfare" due to the "increased tax exposure" ISPs will face at the state and local level, the group said in a letter posted Friday in docket 23-320 (see 2403210026). ACI also noted that some states "consider intangible property to be taxable property" and "the taxation of broader telecommunications property could represent a major increase in the property taxes assessed on licensed spectrum." The impact will be "significant," ACI said, noting broadband services "are not highly inelastic."

“Consumers shouldn’t have to pay higher prices because companies break the law,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland told a news conference Thursday announcing the bipartisan antitrust suit (docket 2:24-cv-04055) against Apple brought by DOJ and the AGs of 15 states and the District of Columbia. DOJ alleges in USA v. Apple that the tech giant has consolidated its monopoly power “not by making its own products better but by making other products worse.”

One in 10 streaming service subscriptions is shared with someone outside the subscriber's household who isn't paying for it, Leichtman Research Group said Wednesday. In addition, it reported 88% of U.S. households have at least one streaming video service from the top 15 services, with 53% of households having four or more direct-to-consumer streaming video services. Leichtman said its data comes from an online survey of 2,546 U.S. households.

Industry officials expect changes in the cyber trust mark rules, set for a vote Thursday, though the extent is still evolving, said lawyers in the proceeding. One wildcard is whether the FCC will attach a further notice, asking questions about issues including the country of origin of security updates under the program. The item is expected to be approved 5-0, with Commissioner Nathan Simington getting some edits to reflect his initial concerns, officials said.

CTIA sought a tweak to the FCC’s proposed cyber mark order, set for a vote March 14 (see 2402220059). In a filing posted Thursday in docket 23-239, CTIA asked the regulator to clarify that “general purpose computing and networking equipment -- including routers,” is excluded from the order. Clarifying the scope of covered devices will “promote consistency with [the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s] efforts more broadly and ensure the FCC’s program conforms to the intended scope,” said the filing. “The clarification on the scope of ‘IoT device’ is useful not just to ensure definitional consistency, but also to promote broader consistency between two parallel workstreams by the FCC and NIST,” CTIA said. NCTA also sought clarity in meetings with Public Safety Bureau and commissioner staff. Clarifications will “make the program more successful in driving security improvements by making it more appealing for manufacturers to join,” NCTA said. Cablers asked for additional clarity on the definition of “IoT product” and “IoT product components.” The FCC should make clear that “decisions related to the certification and renewal requirements and processes should be based on NIST’s standards and guidance,” the group said. NCTA urged the launch of a “centralized registry that can be easily accessed by consumers to inform their purchasing decisions.” A searchable, “one-stop-shop” will “allow consumers to more readily research and compare products that bear the Mark, and it would support the efforts of network operators, security researchers, and other entities to enhance security across the IoT ecosystem.”

While the wireless industry largely supported recommendations in an FCC NPRM on implementing a 100% hearing-aid compatibility (HAC) requirement for wireless handset models, groups representing the deaf and hard of hearing urged tweaks. Commissioners approved the NPRM in December (see 2312130019) and comments were posted this week in docket 23-388. The Hearing Loss Association of America led other groups in urging that the FCC adopt “a forward-looking, flexible definition of hearing aid compatibility that reflects changing technologies.” The FCC should adopt a definition of Bluetooth connectivity “that rests on a set of functional requirements” ensuring HAC compatibility “via Bluetooth … designed to achieve effective HAC use in the widest number of scenarios possible,” the groups said. They called for “an expanded definition of hearing aid compatibility to include Bluetooth connectivity along with telecoil connectivity,” which “does not rely solely on market conditions to ensure that telecoil coupling will continue to be included in handsets.” The FCC should take “a hybrid approach to grandfathering in handsets as outlined by the Commission, with the ultimate goal of 100% of handset models meeting the ANSI C63.19-2019 standard and newer ANSI standards as they are developed,” they said. Signing the filing were the National Association of the Deaf, TDIforAccess, Communication Service for the Deaf and the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing at Gallaudet University. The HAC Task Force urged the FCC to align rules with its December 2022 recommendations (see 2212160063). The task force included both consumer and industry groups, and it adopted a unanimous report based on work that started in 2020. “The HAC Task Force recommendations embrace innovation and future trends while ensuring no consumer will be ‘left behind,’” the task force said: “All … participants support the goal of 100% HAC deployment, and they were proud to present the Commission with a concrete, achievable, consensus path to 100% HAC.” CTIA endorsed the 2022 report. “The recommendations are the fruits of a years-long, consensus-based process designed to answer the very question of whether and how 100% HAC can be achieved to benefit consumers with hearing loss,” CTIA said. Samsung Electronics America also endorsed the task force report. “Samsung’s own experience with Bluetooth demonstrates its importance as a hearing technology that is easily accessible to consumers throughout the United States,” the company said: “As a mainstream and growing technology, Bluetooth holds significant promise for consumers with hearing loss.” CTA said recent research supports the task force’s approach to HAC. “The interlocking recommendations in the Report encourage innovation by setting forth a flexible definition for HAC while ensuring testing to objective standards for compliance with deployment benchmarks,” CTA said. For the first time, the rules “incorporate Bluetooth into deployment benchmarks,” CTA said.

Maryland this week moved one step closer to becoming the 15th state to pass comprehensive online privacy legislation by hosting debate in both chambers on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Public interest and consumer groups urged the FCC take a more aggressive stance on a November Further NPRM about protecting consumers from SIM swapping and port-out fraud (see 2311150042). CTIA said the commission should “pursue a flexible and risk-based approach” toward customer account security and fraud deterrence. Reply comments were due this week in docket 21-341, and they largely mirror initial comments (see 2401180053).

The FTC’s proposed rules for moderating fake online reviews are overly broad and carry liability risks that will result in platforms censoring legitimate reviews on sites like Google, Facebook and Yelp, the Interactive Advertising Bureau said Tuesday.