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.
Comments on “FCC To Boston Airport: You Know We Meant It When We Said You Can't Control WiFi”
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.
Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway
you mean you don’t live here for the taxes?
Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway
how many people can pronounce this name? huh?
Re: Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway
Woostah boy :oP
Re: Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway
It’s a Woostah Accent, Dick.
I can do it. 🙂
On another note, this is just another reason I fly out of Manch-Vegas.
Re: Massport Is A Hack-a-rama Anyway
(wooster)
Why does this not surprise me.....
I would wager that Massport either already does, or is planning on offering a pay-per-use WiFi service and they don’t want any competition!
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)
wifi in terminal E was free from Comcast about 1 y
There is, or was free wifi from Comcast in the Northwest Airlines concourse of E
Why does this not surprise me.....
wouldn’t it be good to suck at obesity and poverty? as in… we suck at obesity and poverty, everyone is skinny and rich… …?
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.
Re: Simple confusion...
Are you just making stuff up or can you back that up with sources?
Comcast has a deal with MassPort
Comcast offers pay WiFi at Logan. Can’t let someone muscle in on their turf.
According to the article, the FCC already issued an order on this subject over two years ago which Massport has just been ignoring. So what’s the FCC going to do about it? Issue another order. What’s to keep Massport from just ignoring another one?
Fine?
Usually when the FCC issues a second statement it comes with a heafty fine doesn’t it?
Statewide WiFi
On a sidenote, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Deval Patrick wants free WiFi statewide: http://www.devalpatrick.com/resources/pdf/policybook_web.pdf
It’s a pie-in-the-sky proposition right now, but what would WiFi service providers think about that? Ouch.
Wistah!
Yeah, you heard. Born and bred in Worcester County.
Welcome to Massachusetts politics! We beleive in falling ceiling tiles, and then paying people to resign.
Oh! People mandate (ballot question) a lower tax rate, or tax cap, the government just ignores it. Pretends it didn’t happen. WTF?!?
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