[SML] FCC rules on wifi jamming.

[Jeffrey Kanyuck]

One of the problems I see with this is you'd be blocking the cell reception of guests trying to use their phones for regular calls. Guests aren't going to stay in a hotel where they can't get phone calls especially if it's for business.

From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft-bounces at theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Chip Wood via Stagecraft
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 4:36 PM
To: Stagecraft Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SML] FCC rules on wifi jamming.

As long as they never mention "wi-fi" or "blocking" on any construction document.  Every little cafe, coffee,  and pizza joint has big ads offering free wi-fi, but every business class or higher hotel makes you pay a ridiculous amount for it.    Yet they call themselves full service.  Weird?

But this only applies to active RF jamming or "deauthorization?" of personal Wi-Fi hot spots operating on mobile networks right, not construction blocking or Wi-Fi jamming.

Chip 1

On 1/28/2015 1:41 PM, Richard Niederberg via Stagecraft wrote:
Dear Dale,
If they built their Hotels like Faraday cages, to strengthen the building from all EMR [Think a real-life version of the fictional 007 'GoldenEye'], they wouldn't have a problem with the FCC.
/s/ Richard

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Dale Farmer via Stagecraft <stagecraft at theatrical.net<mailto:stagecraft at theatrical.net>> wrote:


The FCC released it's ruling on the marriott wifi blocking matter.    WHat they did was essentially jamming, and anyone else who tries to do this will get "...substantial monetary penalties."

http://gizmodo.com/the-fcc-fined-marriott-for-600-000-for-blocking-guests-1642154851/1682126231

http://www.fcc.gov/document/warning-wi-fi-blocking-prohibited

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://theatrical.net/pipermail/stagecraft_theatrical.net/attachments/20150129/94813269/attachment.html>