said by axus :

We've got to be willing to pull the licenses if implementers can't make the technology behave.

said by Sammer :

"Several tests were performed with DTV signals present in adjacent channels.
These tests showed that in the presence of moderate-to-strong signals in a first adjacent channel, the detection threshold sensitivity of all of the devices was severely impacted.
For some of the devices, the degradation in the detection sensitivity was as much as 60- 70 dB.
In some cases, the degradation was such that the detection threshold could not be measured.
This could impact significantly the ability of the devices to reliably detect TV signals within stations’ service areas."

"In some instances, the Adaptrum, I2R, and Motorola (in sensing only mode)
devices incorrectly reported channels as unoccupied (available) when the
WSD was operated within a station’s service contour and the signal was
viewable."

BTW, anyone who has seen what a mess the FCC database currently is has to wonder how well geo-location will work.

said by axus :

I think it's a great idea, lets use our bandwidth more efficiently. But, we have to be willing to pull the plug if it doesn't work out. Broadband over power line was worth trying, but we didn't give it a pass to go interfering with everything. We've got to be willing to pull the licenses if implementers can't make the technology behave.

said by DavePR :

Once you flood the market with cheap devices there is no chance to recall them if a problem is later discovered. Take for example all the illegal Sirius (and XM) radios with FM modulators that are way too powerful.

said by probboy :

While a 6 Mhz television channel can carry a bit of data long-distances, it still seems like it would be fairly expensive to set up all the infrastructure for a third pipe. This might work well as a last mile replacement in areas without DSL or cable, assuming they set it up similar to a cell phone network (relatively low power transceivers covering small areas).