\u201cThe leader in 5G \nstands to gain hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue over the next \ndecade, with widespread job creation across the wireless technology \nsector. 5G has the potential to revolutionize other industries as well \u2026\n The country that owns 5G will own many of these innovations and set \nstandards for the rest of the world\u2026<\/strong><\/em><\/p>
That country is currently not likely to be the United States.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\u201cThe 5G Ecosystem: Risks & Opportunities for DoD,\u201d Defense Innovation Board<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
(L\n to R) Mark Sirangelo, Milo Medin, Jennifer Pahlka, Eric Lander, Marne \nLevine, Eric Schmidt, J. Michael McQuade, Missy Cummings, Richard \nMurray, and Adam Grant. (DOD\/Lisa Ferdinando)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Chaired by former Alphabet Chairman Eric Schmidt, the Board was \ncommissioned by former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to make \nrecommendations to the Dept. of Defense on the next wave of innovation. \n <\/p>\n\n\n\n
I recommend the 30-page document itself, but if you\u2019re pressed for time, try Dr. Lee, Physic Genius\u2019 more entertaining version<\/a> though, disclosure, despite some inquiries, I have no idea who Dr. Lee is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A technical approach that deepens divisions<\/em> <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
In the United States, the Federal Communications Commission allocates\n the electromagnetic spectrum. Most current 5G development is in the \n\u201csub-6\u201d range. But in the United States, the military owns that portion \nof the spectrum. So the FCC made a higher-band width known as \u201cmmWave\u201d \navailable for commercial development, which is where Verizon and \nAT&T are developing their 5G offerings. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Courtesy of Policy Tracker<\/a> <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Only two other countries currently support mmWave for 5G. Both of \nthese countries are now U.S. allies \u2014 Japan and South Korea \u2014 and both \nare using a dual strategy, developing both the sub-6 and mmWave ranges. \n <\/p>\n\n\n\n
U.S. policy makers and suppliers hope mmWave will eventually become \nthe global standard, but as the Defense Innovation Board report makes \nclear, it\u2019s not a strategy to hang your hat on. MmWave transmissions are\n more powerful but shorter and blocked by solid barriers \u2014 walls, trees,\n even people. Providing comprehensive service will require what the \nreport labels a \u201cmassive infrastructure build-out\u201d ($$$). If and when \nthat is successful, mmWave service may not be viable for rural areas, \nwhere reliable connectivity is a literally a lifeline. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Consider that despite diplomatic tensions with China, Canada recently signed a contract<\/a>\n with Huawei to deliver 4G LTE to rural communities in the Arctic, \nremote areas of north-eastern Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador and \naccording to Huawei, some 25 communities in the largely Inuit areas of \nthe Nunavut territory. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Own the IP; own the industry <\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
No American company makes the base station equipment to transmit 5G \nsignals. The United States owned the majority of 4G-related \nstandards-essential patents. But today over one-third, (34%) of \nworldwide standards-essential patents for 5G technology are owned by \nChinese companies, 15% by Huawei alone, according to Asia Nikkei News<\/a>. South Korea is second, with over 25% of standard-essential patents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
That will make building the network infrastructure for autonomous \ncars or next generation factories more expensive for U.S. companies. But\n owning the intellectual property will reduce costs and accelerate \nChina\u2019s building the infrastructure of the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Courtesy of Nikkei Asian Review<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Huawei has signed 50 contracts to provide next-generation 5G networks to 30 countries including Italy and the United Kingdom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/a>
Courtesy of Nikkei Asian Review<\/a> <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n We damn the consequences at our peril <\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Were the United States to decide to compete with the rest of the \nworld, the Board\u2019s report provides a timeline. Sharing the sub-6 \nspectrum will take five years, and the Board considers a sharing \nspectrum a viable alternative. Clearing the spectrum would take 10 \nyears. This would get us to the starting gate \u2014 if the federal \ngovernment were to open up the sub-6 range. And that\u2019s a big \u201cif\u201d in \nthis political environment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/chryscommdotcom.files.wordpress.com\/2019\/08\/dib-e1564679819634.jpg?w=626&h=220\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/chryscommdotcom.files.wordpress.com\/2019\/08\/spectrumallocation_3gpp.jpg?w=647&h=347\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/chryscommdotcom.files.wordpress.com\/2019\/08\/5g-patents_asiannikkei-news.png?w=489&h=467\")