[Battlemesh] TP-Link FCC deal

[Gui Iribarren]

On 01/08/16 21:59, Ben West wrote:
> While certainly good news, I don't see how the FCC has authority to
> stipulate such requirements.

ideally, via imposing fines? anyway, the press release doesn't mention
any "requirement", only that TPLink promised to investigate how to allow
third-party firmwares ...without breaking the FCC rules :P

Quote from the pdf:

As part of the settlement, TP-Link has agreed to adopt robust compliance
measures to ensure that its existing and future Wi-Fi routers are in
compliance. TP-Link has also agreed to work with the open-source
community and Wi-Fi chipset manufacturers to enable consumers to install
third-party firmware on their Wi-Fi routers.

in particular:

TP-Link has also agreed to take steps to support innovation in
third-party router firmware by committing to investigate security
solutions for certain 5 GHz band routers that would permit the use of
third-party firmware while meeting the Commission’s security
requirements and maintaining the integrity of critical radio parameters.


AFAIU, tplink paid a fine of 200k usd for an... unintended feature in
their *stock* firmware

"In its investigation, the Enforcement Bureau found that TP-Link
marketed several Wi-Fi router models in the U.S. that included a user
setting that violated Section 15.15(b) of the Commission’s rules by
enabling the routers to operate at power levels that exceed their
approved parameters on certain restricted Wi-Fi channels."



> 
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Benjamin Henrion <zoobab at gmail.com
> <mailto:zoobab at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     How do you interpret this news?:
> 
>     https://build.slashdot.org/story/16/08/01/1855206/fcc-requires-tp-link-to-support-open-source-router-firmware
> 
>     Is it just PR from the FCC side?
> 
>     Best,
> 
>     --
>     Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org <http://ffii.org>>
>     FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 <tel:%2B32-484-566109> -
>     +32-2-3500762 <tel:%2B32-2-3500762>
>     "In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software
>     patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy.
>     Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of
>     software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent
>     court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their
>     favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or
>     democratically elected legislators."
>     _______________________________________________
>     Battlemesh mailing list
>     Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org <mailto:Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org>
>     http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ben West
> ben at gowasabi.net <mailto:ben at gowasabi.net>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Battlemesh mailing list
> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh
>