FCC To Boston Airport: You Know We Meant It When We Said You Can't Control WiFi

from the and-again-and-again-and-again dept

Why does this story keep coming up? We have no idea. It’s been over two years since the FCC stated in no uncertain terms that airports cannot dictate to airlines how they can offer WiFi. Only the FCC has the authority to regulate the airwaves, and no “landlord” can tell you not to. Yet, for some reason, Boston-Logan International Airport (run by Massport) simply won’t give up. Despite the FCC ruling, they tried to tell Continental Airlines it couldn’t offer free WiFi at the airport, and later made the entirely bogus claim that this was actually a security issue, and that Continental’s free WiFi might interfere with someone else’s WiFi and create a security problem. The proper response to that, of course, is to ask why Massport is relying on WiFi for security purposes. Though, honestly, that’s really beside the point. The FCC had already made it perfectly clear that the airport can’t tell the airlines what to do, so it’s no surprise to hear that the FCC is about to explain to Massport that they weren’t kidding about that in the past, and that Massport really needs to back off and let Continental offer whatever it wants.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “FCC To Boston Airport: You Know We Meant It When We Said You Can't Control WiFi”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Dam says:

Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway

Massport is the airport authority in charge of Logan Airport, the gateway for the Islamo terrorists that casued 9/11. It;s an agency that is run by a bunch of relatives of actve and retired politicians, i.e. hacks.

If they don’t get their cut, they try to stop anyone else. It’s just that simple.

Massport is yet another reason I’m so proud to live in this moonbat state.

wto605 (profile) says:

Re: Why does this not surprise me.....

They probably have (or… even “worse”, are working on) a contract with someone like Wayport to offer pay-per-use in specified areas concentrated around retail/food courts like ATL… As soon as Continental’s coverage is spread enough that anyone can get on while staying within a few thousand feet of their gate any contract like this goes right out the window. I don’t know, I’ve only flown into/out of BOS once and we were back in the boonies of a terminal because we were on an “express” flight (the only thing that happens faster is the back-ache form the small planes) form Cleveland.

P.S./Just out of curiosity: Is BOS really a Continental hub? They already have Newark, Cleveland, and Chicago (though if the Delta merger goes though we’ll probably loose our hub 🙁 and then be the only city to suck at EVERYTHING… sports, obesity, stress, poverty, politics, you name it… Cleveland sucks at it)

Jordan Lund says:

Simple confusion...

I think the confusion originates from the airport maintaining (correctly) that an airline may not operate a wifi hotspot on the airports network.

If the airline wants to have a dedicated DSL or cable line installed and offer wifi over that then fine. But I sure as heck wouldn’t allow a renter to install a hotspot on my corporate network.

piedoggie says:

Re: taxes and wifi

Matt, we did have a property tax limit put in place quite a few years ago. But it has been steadfastly ignored by people who are willing to pay for additional taxes for specific services.

for example, in my town of Westford we have had a series of property tax overrides to purchase land that should be kept as green space. green space is a good thing financially for the community since every dollar of tax revenue brought in by a new property creates demand for $1.5 worth of services.

After reading Deval’s applause point on statewide WiFi, it’s not great happen. It would take way too many access points given the terrain and population density. I think we have a greater chance of success if we make use of the FCC plan to share the VHF television spectrum with a wifi like system. That way we could get greater coverage for a smaller number of access points. We would need a better protocol because the hidden transmitter problem would be even more significant than it is on 2.4 GHz.

no sweat, no taxes

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...