Re: wifi blocking [was Re: Marriott wifi blocking]

[Jimmy Hess <mysidia () gmail com>]

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Keenan Tims <ktims () stargate ca> wrote:
> I don't think it changes much. Passive methods (ie. Faraday cage) would
> likely be fine, as would layer 8 through 10 methods.

Well... actually...  passive methods are probably fine, as long as
they are not breaking reception to nearby properties, BUT it might
result in some proceedings or investigations regarding anticompetitive
behaviors  ---  also, if there are other businesses nearby,  it  could
lead  to some objections when you go seeking permits to build this
giant faraday cage.    The local authorities might eventually require
some modifications.  :)

> Actively interfering with the RF would probably garner them an even
> bigger smackdown than they got here, as these are licensed bands where

It's even worse....  these frequencies are licensed, and willfully
transmitting into the frequencies with enough power to block cell
calls  from an unauthorized station has severe penalties,   even if it
never interferes with a single phone or the licensee's use  of the
restricted frequencies.

If it DOES interfere,  then you have two potential violations
(Unauthorized emission PLUS Interference) and there are likely more
stations they would be interfering with than WiFi APs,  so there are
more violations and more complaints likely to be generated.

And these violations are more severe, since they can interfere with
emergency communications (E911);   I think it's fair to say penalties
would likely be larger.


The only way to legally block cell phone RF would likely be on behalf
of the licensee ----  In other words, possibly, persuade the cell
phone companies to allow this,   then  create an approved "special"
local cell tower  all their phones in the same building will by
default connect to  in preference to any other,  which will also  not
receive any calls or messages   or allow any to be sent.

--
-JH