Today's declaratory ruling reaffirms the Commission's dedication to promoting the widespread deployment of unlicensed Wi-Fi devices. It clarifies that American consumers and businesses are free to install Wi-Fi antennas under our OTARD rules . meaning without seeking approval from their landlords . just as they are free to install antennas for video programming and other fixed wireless applications.

Wi-Fi is one of the Commission's greatest wireless success stories. The genius of this unlicensed technology is that no central authority controls or manages how and where these networks spring up. Instead, any private or commercial operator who sees a need for a local Wi-Fi network may build and operate one. The price that Wi-Fi users pay for this freedom is that they, like all Part 15 users, must accept interference from other devices in the unlicensed bands. But the nation's half-decade of experience with this new technology has made it quite plain that this trade-off is more than worth it. When it comes to providing broadband over the unlicensed bands, the airwaves are truly the people's airwaves. So while I certainly support strong licensing regulation in some contexts, I think it is equally important that we leave other portions of the spectrum open to unlicensed uses.

Today's decision ensures that the Wi-Fi bands remain free and open to travelers, who can make productive use of their time while waiting to catch their next flight in an airport. They will be able to choose from among multiple providers, including members-only airport lounges as well as coffee shops or businesses that may choose to attract customers by offering Wi-Fi service at lower prices than the airport authority offers.

I do want to note that I approve of today's decision only because the record is clear . in fact, uncontested . that allowing multiple Wi-Fi operators in the airport will cause no interference to the safety-of-life communications that the airport authority conducts on its dedicated, separate, and licensed public safety channels. In the unlikely event that technical developments change this balance, I would of course support swift and forceful remedial action from this Commission.

Today we strike a victory for the WiFi revolution in the cradle of the American Revolution. The WiFi movement embodies the spirit of American freedom, and in our action we say "don't tread on me." The movement has been one of the great telecommunications success stories because it enables American consumers and businesses to offer and receive broadband services at the most local levels . at any time, in any place.

In this vein, I support the application of our OTARD rules to unlicensed devices under Part 15 of our rules because these devices transmit and receive fixed wireless signals as is required by OTARD. That Part 15 services are "unlicensed" does not mean that they should be treated differently than "licensed" ones for purposes of our OTARD rules.

Of course, I am sensitive to the operational challenges presented by airport environments. And the Commission has in place numerous services and rules that allow for licensed communications by public safety and commercial entities alike in these locales. To the extent there is an interference problem with these licensed operations, particularly those involving public safety services, we should quickly step in.

But these same protections can not and should not extend to WiFi use. While unlicensed services are ubiquitous, WiFi users are not able to claim the same interference protection typically afforded licensed operators. It's an important tradeoff, and a critical one. As we affirm today, WiFi users can freely deploy their networks in areas under their control, but, in return, must accept interference from other WiFi operators.