The National Antenna Consortium has suggested that the FCC establish BPL-free zones in which BPL would not be permitted within 20 miles of airports and antennas for ground-to-air communications and military bases, and within two miles of hospitals, police stations, and fire stations.

The International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA), which operates radio call boxes used by the public to call for fire, police, ambulance, road service or other assistance, submit that there are public safety systems that must be protected from harmful interference.

Global2Way Acquisition, LLC, which operates a low power communications service for intra/interstate trucking companies on HF frequencies under secondary licenses, asks that that the FCC proceed carefully on Access BPL, balancing the laudable goal of providing new services against the potential harm to existing services.

And, of course, the ARRL (American Radio Relay League) has gone on a high-powered offensive against BPL. Next week, we'll run a detailed commentary from the ARRL's chief engineer containing his reasoning.

Follow the money
We're still trying to figure this one out. From all we know of the FCC and their desire to protect the radio spectrum, I have some trouble accepting the claims of the ham operators. It seems to me that it's likely to have been doubtful that the FCC would approve this technology if it was broadcasting as intensely as the hams claim.

Whenever there's a dispute this strong, I always look to where the money interests are. We know where the interests of the BPL advocates are. After all, they have chips, equipment, and services to sell. They have a clean, apparent reason for pushing their agenda.

I'm not so sure about the ARRL. The ARRL is a membership organization, but it's also a very well-connected political organization as well. How many of the ham radio operators who contacted us experienced problems on their own and how many just read the lobbying documents provided by the ARRL in the organization's magazine?

Who's funding the ARRL? Do the cable providers and DSL providers have an interest in this debate? After all, BPL is a direct competitor to cable modems and DSL services. Or is this truly the case of one technology interfering with another?

Frankly, if it were just ham radio operators unable to play with their toys, this debate would be a non-issue. Ham radio is really a technology of the 20th Century. It was exciting back then when you couldn't call any country easily except with a ham radio. It was exciting when you couldn't talk to anyone when they were out and about unless they had an operator's license.

But today, we have cell phones and Skype. We can talk to anyone, anywhere. And we can reach people all over the world merely for the cost of sustaining a broadband connection. Technology that can deliver broadband is, in Computing Unplugged's opinion, more valuable than ham radio as a hobby.

But radio, especially when used as an emergency response tool (and this very definitely includes ham radio), is critically important. As is quality broadband. The debate, thusfar, hits both of these issues. Detractors say that BPL interferes with emergency radio, and that any old baby monitor can cause your BPL broadband signal to drop as well.