View Single Post
Old 07-09-2019, 08:41 PM
Bassman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Florida
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Why is there any regulation of receive-only stations at all? I mean, it makes plenty of sense to regulate anything that can transmit: There's a limited amount of bandwidth available, after all. But why should anyone care what anyone else is receiving?
According to this article from Inside GNSS magazine, it has to do with the WTO Telecom Agreement from the 1990s and was not targeted at the use of foreign GNSS, but the FCC determined it was covered by the regulation.

In her comments (TXT) supporting granting the waiver for Galileo, commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel stated what I believe to be the reality of the foreign GNSS situation- the horse has left the barn, and the commission should change their rules to reflect that:

While our rules require wireless devices in the United States to have a license—like the one we grant here—before operating with foreign satellites, the reality is more complicated. Go ahead, pull out your phone. Now look up the device specifications for it online. There’s a very good chance that it is already capable of receiving not just the European signals we give the go ahead for today, but also Russian and Chinese signals, too. That’s because our phones are built to be used anywhere in the world—not just the United States. So they include chips that are designed to operate with global navigation satellite systems of other countries.

If you read the record in this proceeding and others like it, it becomes clear that many devices in the United States are already operating with foreign signals. But nowhere in our record is there a good picture of how many devices in this country are interacting with these foreign satellite systems, what it means for compliance with our rules, and what it means for the security of our systems. We should change that. Technology has gotten ahead of our approval policies and it’s time for a true-up.