<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;clearwire&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:22:52 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Clearwire Supports Net Neutrality? Does No One Remember Its History?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090922/0338406275.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090922/0338406275.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ How quickly people forget.  With the FCC's announcement about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090921/1053166271.shtml">support for net neutrality legislation</a> the PR and lobbying machines of the major telco and cable providers have cranked up, putting out all sorts of fear mongering letters and reports about the damage such a law will do.  There was one interesting exception.  Some noticed that wireless broadband provider <a href="http://moconews.net/article/419-theres-at-least-one-wireless-company-thats-for-net-neutrality/" target="_new">Clearwire appeared to support the FCC's position</a> (though, I'd argue that the statement's wording is a bit vague).  While the article at Moconews suggests this "isn't surprising," I'm wondering how everyone seems to have forgotten that Clearwire, in the past, was one of the most aggressive broadband providers to support a <i>non</i> neutral network.  A few years back, it was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050325/1128226.shtml">blocking VoIP and streaming media</a> and proudly promised to block any type of traffic or application it didn't like.  It also tried to get VoIP providers to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050921/2128243.shtml">get "certified"</a> before promising they could work on Clearwire's network.  Of course, plenty can change in a few years, but it's quite noteworthy that Clearwire may have changed its tune on net neutrality entirely.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090922/0338406275.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090922/0338406275.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090922/0338406275.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>that's-funny...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090922/0338406275</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Nov 2008 18:30:07 PST</pubDate>
<title>FCC Just Couldn't Stop Voting</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081104/1612362737.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081104/1612362737.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Well, it's election day and apparently the FCC commissioners liked voting so much they took votes on just about everything.  Amazingly, it looks like they even made some good decisions.  The big one, of course, and the one that will get the most press, is the unanimous vote to <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TEC_FCC_WHITE_SPACES?SITE=CADIU&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT" target="_new">free up television "white space" spectrum</a>.  While the NAB made a last ditch effort to stop this, the FCC made the right call here.  This spectrum can be put to <i>much</i> better use, which can have a huge impact on increasing innovation and wireless technologies.  This is a big win.  The FCC also <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FCC_SPRINT_CLEARWIRE?SITE=CADIU&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT">approved Sprint and Clearwire's</a> deal to set up a joint venture for their WiMax operations, as well as allowing <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FCC_VERIZON_ALLTEL?SITE=CADIU&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT">Verizon to buy Alltel</a>.  Both of those deals make sense as well, so it's good to see them approved.
<br /><br />
Other than that, the FCC said that it's going to start looking into <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CABLE_PRICING_FCC?SITE=CADIU&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT">the pricing policies of cable companies... and Verizon</a>.  Who's missing?  FCC boss Kevin Martin's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080310/004649483.shtml">best friends over at AT&#038;T</a>.  To be honest, while it's quite likely that the cable companies and the telcos (yes, including AT&#038;T) are abusing their oligopoly position, the answer shouldn't be having the FCC act as a watchdog over pricing policies, but for a better system to be set up that encourages real competition.  In the meantime, though, can someone explain why AT&#038;T was left out of the bunch?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081104/1612362737.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081104/1612362737.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081104/1612362737.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>election-day-festivities</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081104/1612362737</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 04:12:30 PDT</pubDate>
<title>AT&#038;T Wants To Throw Some FCC Roadblocks Into Sprint, Clearwire Joint Venture</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1616331798.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1616331798.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ In a move that is clearly designed to just piss off and waste the resources of a competitor, AT&#038;T has <a href="http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200807241913DOWJONESDJONLINE000908_FORTUNE5.htm" target="_new">filed papers with the FCC opposing Sprint and Clearwire's plan to merge</a> their WiMax divisions, which was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml">announced</a> a few months ago (found via <a href="http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Whines-About-SprintClearwire-Merger-96396">Broadband Reports</a>.  Of course, AT&#038;T has a chummy relationship with the FCC, who has allowed it to merge with telco after telco without many real conditions (and even telling it that it can <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070101/224728.shtml">ignore</a> some of the conditions it <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061228/181255.shtml">agreed to</a> to get those mergers approved).
<br /><br />
In this case, AT&#038;T claims that it isn't really opposed to the merger, but it's filing opposition papers because it feels that Sprint and Clearwire aren't receiving the same level of scrutiny that AT&#038;T received in its mergers, specifically with regards to it spectrum holdings.  This seems like grasping at straws by AT&#038;T just to throw some sort of extra paperwork roadblock in the path of the new Clearwire, which is an obvious competitor.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1616331798.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1616331798.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1616331798.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>good-luck-with-that</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080725/1616331798</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Jun 2008 18:37:38 PDT</pubDate>
<title>The Meaningless WiMax Patent Pool</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080609/0255371342.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080609/0255371342.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There are some folks who believe that the solution to patent problems is to just have everyone who claims to have a patent on a certain technology throw it into a "patent pool" and then those who use the technology pay up a fee that gets divided up among pool members.  It sounds nice, but in practice, it almost never works.  Setting up a patent pool actually encourages the wrong behavior: it encourages plenty of other patent holders to claim they deserve to be a part of the pool, and if they're not included, they start suing like crazy.  Also, it encourages companies to try to get any kind of patent that might get them included in a pool, leading to all sorts of crazy claims.  It's the exact opposite of the type of behavior that should be encouraged.
<br /><br />
So, don't read too much into the fact that a bunch of companies in the WiMax space have  <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9962809-7.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_new">agreed to put together a patent pool under the amusingly inaccurately named "Open Patent Alliance."</a> The companies involved, Cisco, Intel, Samsung, Sprint, Alcatel-Lucent, and Clearwire are all betting big on WiMax deployments, so they know it's in their best interest to get the licensing out of the way.  But you'll notice that there are a lot of companies missing -- including Wi-LAN who has been claiming that it owns all the key patents over WiMax technology <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20040528/103321.shtml">for years</a>.  The patent pool sounds nice, but it's certainly not going to diminish the number of patent lawsuits that arise over WiMax technology.  If anything, it's just going to make all those other companies even angrier.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080609/0255371342.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080609/0255371342.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080609/0255371342.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>somebody's-missing....</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080609/0255371342</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 19:19:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Sprint And Affiliate Sue Each Other Over Legality Of New WiMax Effort</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080512/1819491094.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080512/1819491094.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ In certain markets, Sprint has always used affiliates to sell its service, rather than building out its own efforts.  Some of those affiliate relationships caused problems back in 2004/2005 when Sprint merged with Nextel -- as Nextel's service existed in some of those markets, potentially "competing" with the Sprint affiliates who had agreements that Sprint would not compete directly.  So, with the new <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml">WiMax joint venture</a> with Clearwire, Sprint knew that the big affiliate iPCS would be upset.  In fact, last week, Sprint <a href="http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080511/BUSINESS/805110331/1003" target="_new">sued iPCS in Delaware</a> seeking a declaratory judgment that the new joint venture <i>did not</i> break their agreement with iPCS.  That lawsuit appears to have been filed slightly before iPCS <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2008/05/12/daily3.html">filed its own lawsuit in Illinois</a> against Sprint.  Chances are the two suits will be combined in some manner, but it's yet another hurdle that Sprint needs to clear before it can get this new WiMax offering off the ground.  Sprint may have a decent claim here -- as the agreement with iPCS is focused only on 1.9GHz spectrum, whereas the WiMax network is on 2.5GHz spectrum.  Either way, it seems like these affiliate relationships may be a lot more pain than they're worth.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080512/1819491094.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080512/1819491094.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080512/1819491094.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bad-blood</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080512/1819491094</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 May 2008 20:01:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Intel, Google, Cable Co's Give US WiMax A New Lease On Life (In The Form Of $3.2 Billion)</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A bunch of the worst kept secrets in the wireless broadband world have finally come together.  No one ever really believed that Sprint and Clearwire would <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml">fully</a> break off their WiMax agreement.  It simply made too much sense for them to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml">get back together</a>.  At the same time, everyone also knew that Comcast and Time Warner were <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml">talking to Sprint</a> to help fund WiMax in order to get a wireless pipe with which to compete with the telcos.  And... oh yeah, given how much money Intel had <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060705/1852225.shtml">pumped</a> into WiMax to make everyone think it just <i>had</i> to be the next generation wireless system, there was no way it was going to let Sprint and Clearwire's WiMax plans collapse.  Finally, toss in the fact that Google was known to be <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071112/012637.shtml">interested</a> in Sprint's WiMax plans, and it's not hard to figure out what is actually happening...
<br /><br />
Yes, indeed, Intel, Google, Comcast and Time Warner are teaming up to <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=aRIeaCxVtB7o&#038;refer=home" target="_new">pump $3.2 billion into a joint venture that would merge Sprint and Clearwire's WiMax operations</a> under the Clearwire brand name.  This is certainly no surprise given all the earlier stories, but given how many problems have surrounded WiMax as well as <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070110/153656.shtml">earlier</a> attempts for the cable companies to offer wireless services, don't expect this new venture to go smoothly right from the beginning.  That doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.   Most of the companies involved didn't really have much of a choice but to do this.  Of course, in all this mess, Sprint and Clearwire squandered a portion of the lead they held over AT&#038;T and Verizon.  While it will still take a while for AT&#038;T and Verizon to get LTE plans into motion, all this futzing by Sprint and Clearwire took away some of the huge lead it should have had.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080506/1740131048.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>let's-try-this-again</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080506/1740131048</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:35:22 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Cable Companies Looking To Buddy Up With Sprint Once Again To Save WiMax</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Remember a couple years ago when all the big cable companies <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20051102/0910247_F.shtml">teamed up with Sprint</a> with plenty of fanfare to provide mobile phone service and to compete against Verizon and AT&#038;T?  Whatever happened to that?  Oh, right, it went <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070110/153656.shtml">nowhere</a>.  So, perhaps don't get too worked up over the news today that cable companies Comcast and Time Warner <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WIMAX_FUNDING?SITE=CADIU&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT" target="_new">might be teaming up with Sprint and Clearwire to fund their troubled WiMax efforts</a>.  If you recall, Sprint and Clearwire had a huge deal (with hundreds of millions in backing from Intel) to WiMax the nation, and that deal also <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml">fell apart</a> though everyone knows they've been seeing each other <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml">on the sly</a>.  They know they can't do it alone, so certainly having some support from Comcast and Time Warner could help move this project forward, but there have been so many false starts and stumbles that you can bet this isn't going to go as smoothly as all the players are about to suggest.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080326/100451655.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>let's-see-how-this-works...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080326/100451655</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:22:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Are Sprint And Clearwire Getting Back Together Over WiMax?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A month ago, we noted that the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml">end</a> of Sprint and Clearwire's WiMax partnership was bad news for just about everyone involved.  Almost no one could come up with a good reason for Sprint and Clearwire to end the partnership -- and now it appears that, just like A-Rod <a href="http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071213&#038;content_id=2324707&#038;vkey=hotstove2007&#038;fext=.jsp">returning</a> to the Yankees after a brief breakup, the rumors now are that <a href="http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Sprint-Clearwire-To-Kiss-And-Make-Up-90201">Sprint and Clearwire are getting back together</a> over WiMax.  This really isn't all that surprising.  Both companies had to realize it made more sense to work together on this than going it alone -- and with Verizon Wireless finally deciding to go with <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071129/234855.shtml">LTE</a> for its next generation solution, both Sprint and Clearwire finally realized that they are going to have some competition out there for wireless broadband, and it would help both companies not to slow down the rollout.  At least Scott Boras won't make any more money off of this deal. <b>Update</b>: Then again, maybe not.  Apparently the original report on the potential of Sprint and Clearwire getting back together is <a href="http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/12/14/whats-up-with-clearwire/">incorrect</a>.  Still, it wouldn't be surprising if it did eventually happen anyway.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071214/021754.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ain't-dead-yet!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071214/021754</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 9 Nov 2007 06:55:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Sprint And Clearwire Break Up: Bad News For Both... And Anyone Looking Forward To WiMax</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ While we've been quite critical about WiMax in the past, it was mostly due to the ridiculous <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060407/1010235.shtml">hype</a> around the technology well before it actually existed.  There was so much hype that many (including reporters) simply <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20040519/0240213.shtml">claimed</a> it existed when it did not.  Even some companies referred to their non-WiMax wireless broadband solutions as WiMax.  However, with Intel pumping <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060705/1852225.shtml">hundreds of millions</a> of dollars into it and Sprint deciding to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060808/0552258.shtml">bet</a> on WiMax, we hoped that perhaps it could actually live up to its hype someday (though, not for a long time, certainly).  When Sprint agreed to team up with Clearwire to build a single nationwide WiMax network, it seemed even more reasonable a possibility that it could actually come to be.  Splitting the cost of the infrastructure made a tremendous amount of sense.  So much sense... that it might not be happening.  Due to Sprint's recent troubles (where it's even <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071009/132307.shtml">considering</a> ditching WiMax altogether, due to some incredibly shortsighted investor pressure) <a href="http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/11/sprint-and-clea.html">Sprint and Clearwire have called off their agreement to work together on a nationwide WiMax network</a>.
<br /><br />
This is bad news for just about everyone (with the possible temporary exception of the other US mobile operators and baby bells).  Without the combined effort, it makes it even more questionable whether either one will be able to go much further with WiMax, let alone build their own nationwide WiMax network.  Sprint may end up dropping the WiMax effort altogether (again, due to shortsighted investors) and Clearwire may just be in trouble.  It also hurts anyone who was hoping for <i>real</i> wireless broadband in the near future.  While the other mobile operators and landline broadband providers may breathe a sigh of relief, it means that those companies can slow down their own plans for next generation services, as the competition won't be as fierce and they won't seem quite as late to the game.  There is still some talk that something else could potentially happen with Sprint spinning off its WiMax network plans and merging that with Clearwire, but without the strong backing of Sprint, the plan is less likely to get as far.  This isn't the death of WiMax, but it certainly opens up the opportunity for some other wireless broadband offerings to take away some of the WiMax hype.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071109/003505.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>slow-it-down</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071109/003505</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:59:03 PDT</pubDate>
<title>WiMax Spectrum Fight With School Districts Highlights Market Distorting Effects Of Gov't Monopolies</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071002/020714.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071002/020714.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've tried to point out how government granted monopolies can distort a market, whether it's in the intellectual property space or within wireless spectrum.  For example, take a look at what's happening in the 2.5 gigahertz spectrum space.  A bunch of 2.5 gigahertz spectrum was handed over to schools and non-profits, supposedly for use in education.  The rules on those licenses were that it couldn't be owned by for-profit businesses... but could be licensed to them.  Of course, for many schools, the idea that they owned any spectrum rights at all was a complete mystery.  Many valued the spectrum at absolutely nothing (which was its real value to them) and let the licenses expire.  However, with Sprint's latest <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060808/0552258.shtml">focus</a> on WiMax, it could make use of more 2.5 GHz spectrum.  It already <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20050810/1633246.shtml">owns</a> a bunch, but not enough.  So, of course, now that this spectrum is suddenly valuable to Sprint, schools are <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/vaunted-wimaxs-messy-side-spectrum/story.aspx?guid=%7B3A4C2412-4858-454C-A694-BB738E8DC445%7D">scrambling to renew expired licenses to the spectrum they valued at absolutely nothing</a>, in order to turn around and license it to Sprint for quite a bit of money.  In other words, you have a natural resource given to schools absolutely free.  They didn't value it and didn't have any use for it at all.  Then, a company comes along that actually can do something useful with that spectrum, and the schools are suddenly setting roadblocks in their way.  That doesn't seem like a particularly useful thing -- but thanks to another set of gov't granted monopolies, combined with a complete lack of a comprehensive spectrum allocation policy from the FCC, it's what we're left with.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071002/020714.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071002/020714.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071002/020714.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>worthless-spectrum...-oh-you-want-it?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071002/020714</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>