This is a "think tank" whose sponsors include the Bells, the cable operators, the copyright industries and the proprietary software business.
It’s a front for Luddism.
Proof lies in a recent PFF report stating that open spectrum is dangerous, and it should all be auctioned off to the highest bidder, i.e., the companies which support the PFF.
The conclusion beggars belief. Compare the history of licensed, sold MMDS frequencies to the adjacent WiFi 2.4 GHz band. Which provides the most value, the biggest market? Hmmmm?
It gets worse because this is a forward-looking "report." It means to influence policy going forward. And what many people consider the successor to WiFi, called WiMax, is now looking for spectrum space.
The OECD, which represents the civilized world, has a report up (PDF warning) which states this clearly.
The success of WiMAX partially will depend on the availability of spectrum in OECD markets. Initial equipment will work in one of three main frequency ranges, 2.5, 3.5 and 5 GHz. Existing allocations of spectrum should be examined to see where space could be available for new broadband wireless technologies. Spectrum allocations should be technologically neutral. (Emphasis mine.)
Why does this matter?
In the proprietary world envisioned by the PFF, the WiMax spectrum would be owned by companies who likely have every incentive to ignore it, to kill it, as they killed MMDS.
In the open spectrum world interference is the only issue. Equipment makers compete to create new markets. Growth occurs, as it did in WiFi.
Do you want this growth to happen in Europe, in Asia, or North America?
Don’t let the PFF win.