Company launched four unauthorized satellites

[insert_name]

Swarm has launched 4 satellites on a recent PSLV launch without an FCC liscence

https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/satellites/fcc-accuses-stealthy-startup-of-launching-rogue-satellites

Thoughts?

Edited March 10, 2018 by insert_name

[HebaruSan]

Incredibly in depth and detailed article, though perhaps I shouldn't expect less from the IEEE.

But they launched from India. How exactly does the FCC have jurisdiction?

[Starman4308]

2 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

Incredibly in depth and detailed article, though perhaps I shouldn't expect less from the IEEE.

But they launched from India. How exactly does the FCC have jurisdiction?

I'm not sure they have jurisdiction to prevent the launch, but they do have jurisdiction to say "you may not transmit in the United States".

It's an issue that's never arisen before because everybody played by the rules. Now there are no rules, every man for himself people have to start to think harder about regulating space.

[Scotius]

I guess US based company, that intends to keep doing business in USA needs to adhere to local law. Still... it casts a bad light at procedures of ISRO. I understand that owner of the payload should get all licenses needed - but launch provider's duty is to check if they did their job properly. Old cynic in me is now woddering how much money disappeared from one pocket, and spontaneously materialised in another

[insert_name]

39 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

Incredibly in depth and detailed article, though perhaps I shouldn't expect less from the IEEE.

But they launched from India. How exactly does the FCC have jurisdiction?

because they want to communicate with devices within the U.S.

[tater]

How would the fcc have any input into orbital hazards, which is why they denied it?

 

[YNM]

1 hour ago, HebaruSan said:

But they launched from India. How exactly does the FCC have jurisdiction?

They're US companies.

 

But, retracting over to the wider world, IMO it's the same as aircraft. One of our regional airlines have the Xian, which hasn't had FAA certification. It's not illegal to use, just that because of the "authority" FAA has it cast a bad light (even more after crash).

Another case was the satellite bus stuff.

So yeah, I'd say if that was a company that serves Australia rather than the US, FCC has no jurisdiction... until the command center sits in their soil.

[PB666]

1 hour ago, insert_name said:

Swarm has launched 4 satellites on a recent PSLV launch without an FCC liscence

https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/aerospace/satellites/fcc-accuses-stealthy-startup-of-launching-rogue-satellites

Thoughts?

I think that if Swarm took their case to court, somewhere along the line (i.e. the Supreme Court) the FCC would probably lose. Rather than fight the company they should use other means to get them to alter orbits in such a way that is acceptable. I would hate for this to seem that the FCC is protecting someone elses economic turf.  The reason is that the jurisdiction of the USA or any country ends where we can no longer enforce our laws, basically, and these can only be enforced via treaties and international law. The alternative is that the company know where some important satellites (i.e. DoD) and they really don't want them to collide.

1 hour ago, Scotius said:

Old cynic in me  . . . .

It is interesting that since Space X announced plans to but a satellite based internet service provider that TV stations have been spamming ads. This company in many areas has a virtual monopoly on very high priced satellite services. If there is competition in the US they stand to lose alot of money.