Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King
Home / News & Blogs / Between the Lines

FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco

By | August 15, 2011, 2:49pm PDT

Summary: Whether it was legal or not, we might soon find out as the FCC launches an investigation after wireless networks were blocked in a portion of San Francisco’s subway system.

BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit), one of the subway systems in San Francisco, asked wireless providers to block their signals to four downtown stations in order to disrupt a looming protest.

That move has gotten nationwide attention from everyone ranging from civil liberties groups to that constantly busy hacktivist group, Anonymous.

Now, the Federal Communications Commission is getting involved. The National Journal is reporting that the FCC has released a statement regarding the kerfuffle. Specifically, the FCC will be launching a probe into the incident as the FCC spokesman Neil Grace wrote that “anytime communications services are interrupted, we seek to assess the situation.”

This could go either way for BART. Either the FCC has penned this letter and will conduct an investigation just for the sake of doing so and looking like they’re doing something about the matter, or they could make a bad example out of BART.

Signs are pointing to the latter, as The San Francisco Chronicle posits that BART’s attempt to interrupt cell phone service was illegal, regardless of the method the transit authority used.

Nevertheless, BART is still sticking to its original story that its actions were within their legal rights, arguing that it only “temporarily interrupted service at select BART stations as one of many tactics to ensure the safety of everyone on the platform.” Additionally, wireless signals weren’t blocked outside, but only within four specific stations — not throughout the entire system or even the Transbay Tube.

More protests, which will likely have more to do with these actions rather than the original source of recent protests (a fatal shooting involving BART police), are expected during Monday’s commute.

Related:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Between the Lines”

Topics

FCC, King, San Francisco, Wireless, Federal Government, Wi-Fi, Government, Wireless And Mobility, Rachel King

Rachel King is a staff writer for ZDNet based in San Francisco.

Disclosure

Rachel King

Rachel King has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted in this blog.

Biography

Rachel King

Rachel King is a staff writer for CBS Interactive in San Francisco. Before serving as a contributing editor at ZDNet in New York City for two years, she previously worked for The Business Insider, FastCompany.com, CNN's San Francisco bureau and the U.S. Department of State. Rachel has also written for MainStreet.com, Irish America Magazine and the New York Daily News, among others. Rachel has a B.A. in Mass Communications and History from the University of California, Berkeley and a M.S. in Journalism from Columbia University, where she served as art director for the student magazine, Plated.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
40
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
ScorpioBlue Updated - 20th Aug
Fantasy world?!? It's the freaking LAW. When public utilities use public assets, such as bandwidth, geography, infrastructure, they are required BY LAW to meet certain regulatory obligations, such as comply with E911, location services, offer discounted services to the poor, submit to oversight by the PUC, etc..

Not when the public safety is at risk they don't! It's still their property and they will do what they need to do when lives are at stake. You do not have a Constitutional right to have an active cell phone with you at all times anymore than you have a Constitutional right to drive.

I will agree that social network gatherings on the internet that cause these disturbances are a new phenomena so the courts will have to decide which priorities are paramount. Not deusexmachina and his spoiled "act up" rantings.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
nt_gd_1 15th Aug
Did they ask carriers turn off the towers? Or did BART have equipment that they maintain for this coverage?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
wendellgee@... 15th Aug
"Whether it was legal or not, we might soon find out as the FCC launches an investigation..."

My brain had to reboot after reading that O.o
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@wendellgee@...

I hope you made it past POST before you got to:
"Specifically, the FCC will be launching a probe into the incident as the FCC spokesman Neil Grace wrote that 'anytime communications services are interrupted, we seek to assess the situation.'?

and

"Either the FCC has penned this letter and will conduct an investigation just for the sake of doing so and looking like they?re doing something about the matter, or they could make a bad example out of BART."

EDITOR!!!!!!!!
0 Votes
+ -
Reminds me of other nonsense
facebook@... 16th Aug
This reminds me of Rep. Michael Burgess wanting to impeach Obama for something -- anything. Sorry, no matter how much you want it to be a crime for someone doing something you find inconvenient does not make it so.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
Loverock Davidson_ 16th Aug
It would depend on who owns the wireless equipment. If its all private carriers then they could do it without a reason. I highly doubt these people really need to use their cell phones while on the BART system. Sounds like it was more of a privilege than anything else.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@Loverock Davidson_

Wrong. Private carriers use public airwaves to provide their service, and as such, have certain mandates, such as providing uninterrupted 911 service. Failing to do so, and specifically disrupting the ability to do so IS illegal, and within the purview of the FCC.
Yet another matter on which you opine with no foundation or factual basis.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
PollyProteus 16th Aug
--> "BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit), one of the subway systems in San Francisco, asked wireless providers to block their signals to four downtown stations in order to disrupt a looming protest."

If BART asked the wireless providers to block the signals and didn't actually turn on a signal blocker owned by BART, then there's no foul here. And if BART had credible data that indicated some kind of protest was going to occur that had potential to cause service interruptions and safety concerns for the traveling public, then more power to BART for trying to do the right thing.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
sporkfighter 16th Aug
@PollyProteus When those Arab kids use cell phones and Twitter to coordinate a protest, it's "Democracy in Action!!!"

When Americans use cell phones and Twitter to coordinate a protest, it's quite alright to shut down service.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@PollyProteus
Again, wrong. Why do you offer your opinion as fact on matters you have no understanding of? As pointed out to LD above, as a utility using a public resource, wireless providers are required BY LAW to do certain things, including provide uninterrupted 911 service. Failing to do so violates their contractual mandate.
In particular, blocking access to the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) of the governmental agency that has jurisdiction over the geography from which the call originates is a violation of the FCC E911 rules.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
lfmorrison Updated - 17th Aug
@deusexmachina
So in that case, the FCC would have a beef with the carriers who went along with BART's request, not with BART for making the request in the first place. BART is not in the business of doling out the wireless signal, so they wouldn't be the ones in a contractual relationship with the FCC.

[edit]
Retracted. Apparently, this wasn't a case of the carriers taking any action in response to a request from BART, but rather it was an action taken unilaterally by BART without obtaining the carriers' consent.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
techadmin.cc@... 17th Aug
@deusexmachina??

You make a valid point about 911 service but I think it would also follow that deliberate interruption of a public resource even by private wireless carriers should not be the mandate of any organization for purposes of interfering with free speech. It's quite disconcerting that the carriers cooperated with such a request without a court order.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
canddmf Updated - 16th Aug
Local news reports that the equipment is BARTs cell phone repeater equipment...installed at the 4 mentioned locations. They did not block anybody's signal, but stopped boosting the signal by just turning off their own equipment.

BART didn't have cell phone service for over 30 years and they just installed the repeaters around 5 or 6 years ago.

No crime to turn off your own conenience equipment.

Since when is cell phone reception a "right" to be investigated?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@canddmf

And again, you are wrong. Why are you making declarative statements about matters you are not qualified to comment on? In particular, it IS illegal to block access to the PSAP of the local government agency that responds to 911 calls, whether the relaying equipment is your own or not.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
lfmorrison Updated - 17th Aug
@deusexmachina
So does that mean that it is illegal to build a large metal-ribbed building (which naturally impedes radio signals), and then choose not to install a repeater within that building? And if you install a repeater compatible with one carrier's standards, is it then illegal to omit other repeaters compatible with all other competing carriers' systems? How about later if another carrier comes along, are you breaking the law if you don't install yet another repeater that works with that new carrier's system?

Would this apply to every metal-ribbed building no matter how small? Including every individual home that is built with a metal frame? Are they all breaking the law by not including repeaters compatible with every cellular service provider in the area?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
michaellashinsky@... 17th Aug
@deusexmachina??

So, what you are saying is that if I, as a private citizen or business owner, set up a repeater that I physically own, once I turn it on I can never shut if off again? There has to be more to it than that.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
lfmorrison Updated - 17th Aug
@michaellashinsky

The radiated power emitted from a so-called "femtocell" is so low that none of the FCC's categories of licensing for operating a broadcast station apply to them. So I would suppose it depends, to some extent, on how much RF power your repeater device emits.

If the FCC does not have the authority to license or regulate the device, then they cannot have the authority to prevent it from being turned off if the individual who owns it chooses to do so. The FCC likely would have the authority to prohibit carriers from choosing to blacklist femtocells belonging to deadbeat subscribers, or to prevent 911 calls originating in a femtocell from being permitted to proceed through their network to the 911 call centre. But that's all regulations about how the carrier handles a 911 call after it's left the femtocell and entered the carrier's network -- it has nothing to do with the question of whether the femtocell was powered up in the first place.

(AT&T calls its femtocell a "microcell", but that contradicts the general convention that a microcell has an effective radius of 2 kilometers. AT&T's "microcell", available for private individuals to install in their own home, has an effective radius of approximately 12 metres, placing it firmly in the "femtocell" category".)
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
Lazarus439Z 17th Aug
@deusexmachina?? Since you're so big on being "qualified", exactly what are YOUR qualifications?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
techadmin.cc@... Updated - 17th Aug
@canddmf Since it was provided to the public.

There are certain obligations that come with providing a service and one of those involves providing 911 service. Once anyone takes on that responsibility they cannot just deliberately turn off 911 service. If the protest proceeded in spite of lack of cellular communications and it did indeed pose a danger to commuters, shutting off communications to 911 services would create some serious liability issues don't you think?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
michaellashinsky@... 17th Aug
@techadmin.cc@...

I think you have the smartest comment yet. Very good point.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
kirschde 16th Aug
The 1st amendment guarantees your right to speak. It does not guarantee your right to be heard. Kinda like saying everyone should be allowed to have a radio show. I'm not sure the framers exactly had that in mind.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@kirschde
Yes it is exactly like saying everyone should be allowed to have a radio show.
Which is why everyone IS allowed to have a radio show.
It is EXACTLY what the framers had in mind. (At least most of them, as made clear in the Federalist Papers. This notion that the framers of the Constitution were of one mind, meanwhile, shows a rather distorted understanding of history.)
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
syfr 16th Aug
There should be an interesting decision about preemption.
0 Votes
+ -
Hey Rachel, Try Reading a Newspaper...
Glenn L. 16th Aug
BART notified the carriers (as a courtesy) that they were turning off BART owned equipment operated as a free convenience to commuters. It's like if I turned off an unsecured wireless access point and my neighbor had me investigated for denying him internet access.

You are in S.F and have a M.S. in Journalism from Columbia University... Really?!?!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@Glenn L.

No, it is nothing like that. Again, please read up on E911 regulations before you comment.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
michaellashinsky@... 17th Aug
@Glenn L.

Yeah, that is a better analogy than what I used in a reply I made above.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
techadmin.cc@... 17th Aug
@michaellashinsky@... Sheesh!!! Really??? Your analogy above must be really horrible. There is no analogy between turning off a private wireless access point and denying your unauthorized neighbor internet access and turning off public access to 911 services.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
michaellashinsky@... 17th Aug
techadmin.cc@...

Yeah, after thinking it through some more, it really isn't. It was more what I was thinking and trying to say at the time, but now after more reading, not a better analogy at all. What I wrote above fit the topic much better. Participating in these conversations means I will say something wrong at times.
0 Votes
+ -
Truly ironic that this happens in the most progressive city in the nation.
JohnMcGrew@... 16th Aug
Isn't this the kind of behavior that totalitarian regimes resort to?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
30bob1 16th Aug
@JohnMcGrew@... I used to work in San Francisco and used the Civic Center Station to and from work. At the end of the day, I welcomed the arrival of the train and my easy access to get into the car. This protest was designed to impede the workers from getting on the cars and to stop the trains from running. If you saw the pictures of this, you saw the persons climbing on top of the cars, holding the doors open and blocking all from getting on. It is extremely unsafe in the subway tunnel station to do this.

If stopping the cell phone service to cut the flow of protesters to the next target is your idea of a civil rights violation, then I suggest that you try to use a subway to get home after a full days work and are delayed for two hours and then see if you agree. It was chaos that endangered hundreds of people.

The service was instuted for the convenience of the riders
just a few years ago where for over twenty years there was no access in the tunnels and limited in the stations. I see no civil rights violation here.

By the way, cell phones do work in portions of the stations without the extra server service. You just have to move around to find it.
KEN
0 Votes
+ -
I'm not questioning the criminality of the protesters...
JohnMcGrew@... 16th Aug
...or the inconvenience they may have caused. I am certain that they were most disruptive. They should have been arrested. (Also, I think they're pretty stupid; such poor behavior hardly endears people to your cause)

However, do we really want municipalities to feel free to shut down communications infrastructure every time some bureaucrat senses something is up? After all, isn't that the kind of behavior that we as Americans get quite critical of when it happens in other countries?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
ScorpioBlue Updated - 16th Aug
Some people have really been spoiled by technology.

Wireless is not a right. It's a privilege BART provides to it's customers. They can turn it off whenever they feel like it.

You're probably too young to remember the days before wireless when you had to wait until the next stop in order to make a phone call. Not everything revolves around the last few years of the 21st Century, ya know.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@ScorpioBlue
"They can turn it off whenever they feel like it. "

No, they can't. Why do you make declarative statements about matters you know little about?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
techadmin.cc@... 17th Aug
@30bob1 What you are describing is a matter for law enforcement authorities and does not give the transit authority to interrupt a public service even if it is being provided privately. If the situation truly endangered the public's safety, the transit authority did so further by blocking access to emergency services.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
ScorpioBlue Updated - 17th Aug
No, they can't.

Yes they can. It's their property. Where do you get off believing it's not?

Why do you make declarative statements about matters you know little about?

Why do you make declarative statements about matters you know little about?
0 Votes
+ -
911
x military 16th Aug
I thought the mobiledia mention of loss of 911 service particularly noteworthy and perhaps an argument against shutting down service.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Bart wireless blocking
dskrentz@... 17th Aug
The "cell phone coverage is a civil right" argument is one of the dumbest things I've heard in decades. To recap, BART provides cell phone and wireless service at their expense and discretion in the subway area of their privately owned property. Reception would not be available otherwise. Bart temporarily turned off this service but the service in public (non-BART) areas outside of the stations was unaffected.
So if this is a civil rights issue, what happens if Starbucks stops providing Wi-Fi? Should you be able to tap into your neighbor's router for free? If AT&T removes a pay phone in the neighborhood, do we claim that our constitutional rights have been violated? It would be nice to think that someone will engage in some critical thinking here, but probably not.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  17th Aug
@dskrentz@...
By using public resources, such as bandwidth, providers and utilities take on certain obligations. Your analogies are both inaccurate and ill-fitting. In fact, as the public resources are used, certain services provided in return ARE a right.
You are simply misinformed.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
ScorpioBlue 18th Aug
By using public resources, such as bandwidth, providers and utilities take on certain obligations. Your analogies are both inaccurate and ill-fitting. In fact, as the public resources are used, certain services provided in return ARE a right.

Are you kidding? You are living in a dream world if you believe that. It's their property and they will do as they see fit. Not what @deusexmachina? sees as fit.

Get over yourself.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
deusexmachina  19th Aug
@ ScorpioBlue
Fantasy world?!? It's the freaking LAW. When public utilities use public assets, such as bandwidth, geography, infrastructure, they are required BY LAW to meet certain regulatory obligations, such as comply with E911, location services, offer discounted services to the poor, submit to oversight by the PUC, etc..

The person who lives in a (anti Adam Smith, pure capitalist) fantasy world is you, ScorpioBlue.

Get over yourself indeed.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: FCC launches probe following wireless blocking in San Francisco
ScorpioBlue Updated - 20th Aug
Fantasy world?!? It's the freaking LAW. When public utilities use public assets, such as bandwidth, geography, infrastructure, they are required BY LAW to meet certain regulatory obligations, such as comply with E911, location services, offer discounted services to the poor, submit to oversight by the PUC, etc..

Not when the public safety is at risk they don't! It's still their property and they will do what they need to do when lives are at stake. You do not have a Constitutional right to have an active cell phone with you at all times anymore than you have a Constitutional right to drive.

I will agree that social network gatherings on the internet that cause these disturbances are a new phenomena so the courts will have to decide which priorities are paramount. Not deusexmachina and his spoiled "act up" rantings.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix