Hacker News Reader

Comment by grecy | Hacker News Reader

Does this apply on private property, or on property with sufficient signage?

I've often thought about opening a bar (or movie) theater where all wireless communications are blocked, to force people to not use their phones.

Obviously I'd put up extremely big and obvious signs stating that, and I'd only be blocking if you were inside my building.

Legal?

EDIT: I wouldn't be blocking anyone from setting up a wi-fi hotspot inside my bar, but comms to the outside world would be blocked using that cool paint, or a Faraday cage of some sort.

View on HN

Legal if the building is constructed such that the radio signals required cannot get in or out due to the materials used, like a giant farraday cage.

The FCC does not have the authority to stop you from doing that.

Their authority is in the area of regulating who can USE the airwaves.... they regulate who can broadcast, and how.

And in this case, they are saying that building a device that actively transmits with the intention of preventing other devices from working is illegal.

Private property is irrelevant - the airwaves are public.

  > the airwaves are public.

Specifically, the ISM (Industrial, Scientific, Medical) bands, that common WiFi operates on, are open to use by anyone, and you can't interfere with anyone else's use of them.

Alternatively, you can license (effectively, lease) your own little slice of spectrum from the FCC, and then it's ‘yours’, and then you don't have to use forged packets to stop other people using it — the FCC will slap them for you.

I thought exactly the same. Why they're using ISM band which is free to use, if they want reliable networks they should use such band in the very first place.

Nope, blocking cell phones is even more serious. Not least of which because you'd be blocking 911.

You could, on the other hand, have a policy of "turn off your phone at the door, and if your phone rings or you pull it out, we'll kick you out".

EDIT: Yes, you can build a Faraday cage. Consider carefully whether you really want to do so, or just set a policy ("go outside if you need to answer a call").

> Does this apply on private property

Yes; the notable case where this became a big deal was a hotel interfering with personal WiFi hotspots to avoid competition with the hotel's WiFi offering, where the hotel's interference was declared to violate the prohibition on jamming.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/marriott-pay-600k-resolve-wifi-b...

Not such a good idea when the firefighters are inside and trying to communicate with the fire chief in the parking lot via wireless comms.

If it was legal, I wouldn't want to go there, since it prevents you from dialing emergency response.

I would think you could passively block it (via paint). But probably can't actively block it (jamming).

>If it was legal, I wouldn't want to go there, since it prevents you from dialing emergency response.

...Just like you couldn't prior to about 1995 when cell phones were not a thing.

And let's be perfectly honest, if you really need to dial emergency response in a bar, there's a damn good chance the bar tender will do it on the wall phone, or someone can step outside the door and do it.

And if you traped by fire in a back room? and do bars in the USA have payphones in them any more.

If it was legal, I wouldn't want to go there

Which is fine, and kinda the intention. An establishment that would construct a Faraday cage around itself (or at the very least have "turn your phone off" policy) essentially wants to cater to people who are not like you, and it's perfectly within your rights to vote with your wallet and not patronize a place like that.

People who would enjoy that sort of atmosphere would perhaps be happy to know they're among like-minded people.

I'd say it is OK as long as

a) what you do absolutely positively cannot bleed outside

b) you are not using a wireless jamming device

Reply on news.ycombinator.com