There is certainly a lot of merit to the concept of a "spectrum parallel universe" via cognitive radio (i.e. operating in parallel with the current "spectrum side-by-side" universe).
A solid case could be made that (as a high level concept anyway) it serves the "public interest, convenience, and necessity." That is a necessary argument for the spectrum gatekeepers to make.
For similar reasons as the energy debate (fossil fuels vs alternative energy), "fossil spectrum" is running out while consumption increases, and a determined effort to make the multi-year transition to "alternative spectrum" should probably be a national priority, with a 10-20 year plan and annual milestones.
Can that happen in the face of the FCC believing its National Broadband Plan goal of "freeing up" 500MHz of spectrum in the coming years is a solution for at least the next decade? Probably not, because the FCC plan, at face value anyway, does relieve enough "pressure" to deflate any urgency. It will also require enormous amounts of work to free up that 500MHz, so it not only deflates the urgency, it drains resources from considering it.
All that considered, cognitive radio could be at a tipping point, and could die from neglect due to an increase in perceived lack of necessity. I'm not advocating that position, just pointing it out as both plausible and convenient under the current circumstances.
So the TV white space situation--no matter how many ways it is imperfect and remains imperfect after the FCC Order at the end of the month--will probably be responsible for keeping the fire burning. It is the highest profile "test case." Whether it is even possible to achieve some level of success will depend on what exactly the text of the Order says.
The "wild card" is, as part of freeing up 500MHz, a portion of that 500MHz uses lessons learned from the TV white space situation to plant a couple new seeds. Not sure how likely that is, but we'll see. One thing is certain...there will be much opposition to any new seeds being planted.
|
