In October 2014, the Marriott hatel chain admitted to deliberately jamming quests' mobile Wi-Fi and personal...
Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!
Question:
Transcribed Image Text:
In October 2014, the Marriott hatel chain admitted to deliberately jamming quests' mobile Wi-Fi and personal hotspots and forcing business travelers to pay for the company's own Wi-Fi service. Prices charged ranged from the normal $14.95 per day to fees as high as $1,000 per device per day for exhibitors using hotel conference space. Complaints to the Federal Communications Commission led to a $600,000 settlement, but a combative press release restated the company's argument that it was trying to protect customers from "rogue wireless hotspots," and called for a formal ruling on the issue from the FCC. Marriott was by no means the sole transgressor. Despite clear instructions from the FCC on its website that Wi-Fi Jamming is illegal, many other hotel companies and conference centers have fallen foul of the FCC's stance on the issue In August 2015, Smart City Holdings, LLC, a trade show and convention telecom services provider, was fined $750,000 for blocking customer Wi-Fi services at several sites and charging them $80 per day for access - In November 2015, the FCC proposed a $25,000 fine against Hilton Worldwide Holdings "for its apparent obstruction of an investigation into whether Hilton engaged in the blocking of consumers' Wi-Fi devices. The case referenced an incident at the Hilton Anaheim near Disneylond, where convention attendees were asked to pay a $s00 fee to access the hotel's Wi-Fi system In the same notice, the FCC proposed a $750,000 fine against M.C. Dean, the systems integration company, for allegedly blocking Wi-Fi hotspots at the Baltimore Convention Center. OL Audras/PhotoAlho RP While the position from the FCC's enforcement bureau is clear, the position from Wi-Fi experts is more complex. Using quest security as grounds to generate additional revenue may be nothing new in the hospitality industry, and for many aller properties, that extra revenue can mean the difference between profit and loss on an annual basis, However, hotel IT specialists back that up with an argument that personal Wi-Fi hotspots not only present security risks but also in the performance of the network as a whole as multiple access points overwhelm the capacity of the system. W administrators raise another issue, criticizing the FCC for opening a "Pandora's box" with their Marriott ruling. The eagerness to show strong enforcement against a clear attempt to squeeze extra revenue from guests may be valid. they argue, but outside of the honoitality industry, the ability to jam WI-Fisignals is needed for safe and effective operation taces What happens in a hospital, for example, if visitors disrupt wireless medical equipment when using their cemonal W-hotspots? What happens id journalists overwhelm a multimillion-dollar WI-Fi system at a sports stadium meda event? Munt the stadium owners pay for the repairs? Since the FCC position clearly prohibits jamming of any kind, that would appear to be the case For the hospitalty industry, however, WI-Fi administrators argue that the guest security claim is especially weak Making en investmers in higher grade systems hardware would allow guests to use their personal Wi-Fihotspots without CONTINUED > 6. Is there potential for an equitable resolution of this issue? Why or why not? In October 2014, the Marriott hatel chain admitted to deliberately jamming quests' mobile Wi-Fi and personal hotspots and forcing business travelers to pay for the company's own Wi-Fi service. Prices charged ranged from the normal $14.95 per day to fees as high as $1,000 per device per day for exhibitors using hotel conference space. Complaints to the Federal Communications Commission led to a $600,000 settlement, but a combative press release restated the company's argument that it was trying to protect customers from "rogue wireless hotspots," and called for a formal ruling on the issue from the FCC. Marriott was by no means the sole transgressor. Despite clear instructions from the FCC on its website that Wi-Fi Jamming is illegal, many other hotel companies and conference centers have fallen foul of the FCC's stance on the issue In August 2015, Smart City Holdings, LLC, a trade show and convention telecom services provider, was fined $750,000 for blocking customer Wi-Fi services at several sites and charging them $80 per day for access - In November 2015, the FCC proposed a $25,000 fine against Hilton Worldwide Holdings "for its apparent obstruction of an investigation into whether Hilton engaged in the blocking of consumers' Wi-Fi devices. The case referenced an incident at the Hilton Anaheim near Disneylond, where convention attendees were asked to pay a $s00 fee to access the hotel's Wi-Fi system In the same notice, the FCC proposed a $750,000 fine against M.C. Dean, the systems integration company, for allegedly blocking Wi-Fi hotspots at the Baltimore Convention Center. OL Audras/PhotoAlho RP While the position from the FCC's enforcement bureau is clear, the position from Wi-Fi experts is more complex. Using quest security as grounds to generate additional revenue may be nothing new in the hospitality industry, and for many aller properties, that extra revenue can mean the difference between profit and loss on an annual basis, However, hotel IT specialists back that up with an argument that personal Wi-Fi hotspots not only present security risks but also in the performance of the network as a whole as multiple access points overwhelm the capacity of the system. W administrators raise another issue, criticizing the FCC for opening a "Pandora's box" with their Marriott ruling. The eagerness to show strong enforcement against a clear attempt to squeeze extra revenue from guests may be valid. they argue, but outside of the honoitality industry, the ability to jam WI-Fisignals is needed for safe and effective operation taces What happens in a hospital, for example, if visitors disrupt wireless medical equipment when using their cemonal W-hotspots? What happens id journalists overwhelm a multimillion-dollar WI-Fi system at a sports stadium meda event? Munt the stadium owners pay for the repairs? Since the FCC position clearly prohibits jamming of any kind, that would appear to be the case For the hospitalty industry, however, WI-Fi administrators argue that the guest security claim is especially weak Making en investmers in higher grade systems hardware would allow guests to use their personal Wi-Fihotspots without CONTINUED > 6. Is there potential for an equitable resolution of this issue? Why or why not? In October 2014, the Marriott hatel chain admitted to deliberately jamming quests' mobile Wi-Fi and personal hotspots and forcing business travelers to pay for the company's own Wi-Fi service. Prices charged ranged from the normal $14.95 per day to fees as high as $1,000 per device per day for exhibitors using hotel conference space. Complaints to the Federal Communications Commission led to a $600,000 settlement, but a combative press release restated the company's argument that it was trying to protect customers from "rogue wireless hotspots," and called for a formal ruling on the issue from the FCC. Marriott was by no means the sole transgressor. Despite clear instructions from the FCC on its website that Wi-Fi Jamming is illegal, many other hotel companies and conference centers have fallen foul of the FCC's stance on the issue In August 2015, Smart City Holdings, LLC, a trade show and convention telecom services provider, was fined $750,000 for blocking customer Wi-Fi services at several sites and charging them $80 per day for access - In November 2015, the FCC proposed a $25,000 fine against Hilton Worldwide Holdings "for its apparent obstruction of an investigation into whether Hilton engaged in the blocking of consumers' Wi-Fi devices. The case referenced an incident at the Hilton Anaheim near Disneylond, where convention attendees were asked to pay a $s00 fee to access the hotel's Wi-Fi system In the same notice, the FCC proposed a $750,000 fine against M.C. Dean, the systems integration company, for allegedly blocking Wi-Fi hotspots at the Baltimore Convention Center. OL Audras/PhotoAlho RP While the position from the FCC's enforcement bureau is clear, the position from Wi-Fi experts is more complex. Using quest security as grounds to generate additional revenue may be nothing new in the hospitality industry, and for many aller properties, that extra revenue can mean the difference between profit and loss on an annual basis, However, hotel IT specialists back that up with an argument that personal Wi-Fi hotspots not only present security risks but also in the performance of the network as a whole as multiple access points overwhelm the capacity of the system. W administrators raise another issue, criticizing the FCC for opening a "Pandora's box" with their Marriott ruling. The eagerness to show strong enforcement against a clear attempt to squeeze extra revenue from guests may be valid. they argue, but outside of the honoitality industry, the ability to jam WI-Fisignals is needed for safe and effective operation taces What happens in a hospital, for example, if visitors disrupt wireless medical equipment when using their cemonal W-hotspots? What happens id journalists overwhelm a multimillion-dollar WI-Fi system at a sports stadium meda event? Munt the stadium owners pay for the repairs? Since the FCC position clearly prohibits jamming of any kind, that would appear to be the case For the hospitalty industry, however, WI-Fi administrators argue that the guest security claim is especially weak Making en investmers in higher grade systems hardware would allow guests to use their personal Wi-Fihotspots without CONTINUED > 6. Is there potential for an equitable resolution of this issue? Why or why not? In October 2014, the Marriott hatel chain admitted to deliberately jamming quests' mobile Wi-Fi and personal hotspots and forcing business travelers to pay for the company's own Wi-Fi service. Prices charged ranged from the normal $14.95 per day to fees as high as $1,000 per device per day for exhibitors using hotel conference space. Complaints to the Federal Communications Commission led to a $600,000 settlement, but a combative press release restated the company's argument that it was trying to protect customers from "rogue wireless hotspots," and called for a formal ruling on the issue from the FCC. Marriott was by no means the sole transgressor. Despite clear instructions from the FCC on its website that Wi-Fi Jamming is illegal, many other hotel companies and conference centers have fallen foul of the FCC's stance on the issue In August 2015, Smart City Holdings, LLC, a trade show and convention telecom services provider, was fined $750,000 for blocking customer Wi-Fi services at several sites and charging them $80 per day for access - In November 2015, the FCC proposed a $25,000 fine against Hilton Worldwide Holdings "for its apparent obstruction of an investigation into whether Hilton engaged in the blocking of consumers' Wi-Fi devices. The case referenced an incident at the Hilton Anaheim near Disneylond, where convention attendees were asked to pay a $s00 fee to access the hotel's Wi-Fi system In the same notice, the FCC proposed a $750,000 fine against M.C. Dean, the systems integration company, for allegedly blocking Wi-Fi hotspots at the Baltimore Convention Center. OL Audras/PhotoAlho RP While the position from the FCC's enforcement bureau is clear, the position from Wi-Fi experts is more complex. Using quest security as grounds to generate additional revenue may be nothing new in the hospitality industry, and for many aller properties, that extra revenue can mean the difference between profit and loss on an annual basis, However, hotel IT specialists back that up with an argument that personal Wi-Fi hotspots not only present security risks but also in the performance of the network as a whole as multiple access points overwhelm the capacity of the system. W administrators raise another issue, criticizing the FCC for opening a "Pandora's box" with their Marriott ruling. The eagerness to show strong enforcement against a clear attempt to squeeze extra revenue from guests may be valid. they argue, but outside of the honoitality industry, the ability to jam WI-Fisignals is needed for safe and effective operation taces What happens in a hospital, for example, if visitors disrupt wireless medical equipment when using their cemonal W-hotspots? What happens id journalists overwhelm a multimillion-dollar WI-Fi system at a sports stadium meda event? Munt the stadium owners pay for the repairs? Since the FCC position clearly prohibits jamming of any kind, that would appear to be the case For the hospitalty industry, however, WI-Fi administrators argue that the guest security claim is especially weak Making en investmers in higher grade systems hardware would allow guests to use their personal Wi-Fihotspots without CONTINUED > 6. Is there potential for an equitable resolution of this issue? Why or why not?
Expert Answer:
Answer rating: 100% (QA)
The case under study implies that the people and the process which a institution dose needs to be in ... View the full answer
Related Book For
Fraud Examination
ISBN: 978-1305079144
5th edition
Authors: W. Steve Albrecht, Chad O. Albrecht, Conan C. Albrecht, Mark F. Zimbelman
Posted Date:
Students also viewed these accounting questions
-
Mobile Services Inc. provides wireless communications services to a variety of customers. The following information relates to the companys investments in SAS in 2015 and 2014: Required: 1. Compute...
-
A mobile phone service provider randomly samples customers each year to measure current satisfaction with the service provided. The following table summarizes a portion of the survey, with 100...
-
Many business travelers receive reimbursement from their companies when they travel by air, whereas vacation travelers typically pay for their trips out of their own pockets. How would this affect...
-
In Exercises 3344, use the graph of y = f(x) to graph each function g. g(x) = f(x) - 2 -4,0) -5-4-3 4-33 y = f(x) y (0,0) 2- 3.4 45 -2) (4-2) X
-
Distinguish between a dened benet plan and a dened contribution plan. Why does a dened benet plan present far more complex accounting issues than a dened contribution plan?
-
Travelers pay taxes for ying, car rentals, and hotels. The following data represent the total travel tax for a 3-day business trip in eight randomly selected cities. (a) Determine a point estimate...
-
The following documents are used in the expenditure cycle: Vendor invoice Purchase order Disbursement voucher Purchase requisition Packing slip Receiving report Check Required a. Identify which of...
-
Answer the following multiple-choice questions: Required a. Which of the following would not be an example of the use of a multiple when valuing common equity? 1. Multi-period discounted earnings...
-
What you believe is the most important professional experience you will take away from operations management course and how it will support your career progression
-
How could the city have avoided the outcome? Explain. Do you think that it would have made sense for the city to consider the particulars of the circumstances here, such as that these were...
-
Determine taxable income in each of the following independent cases. In all cases, the company was very profitable in all years prior to 2017 and it had retained earnings of $1,000,000 at the end of...
-
A container contains 15 diesel engines. The company chooses 7 engines atrandom, and will not ship the container if any of the engines chosen are defective. Find the probability that a container will...
-
Jack Jensen is looking at the latest budget report and sees a static budget amount and a flexible budget amount.Data is as follows: Budget Sales1,000 units @ $10.00 per unit Actual Sales1,200 units @...
-
A survey of all 35 employees at a small company of them like the recent changes to the company's benefits. Is this percentage a parameter or a statistic and why? Parameter as it represents the...
-
What responsibilities do employees have in hospitality business related to personal presentation? List any 5
-
1. Define and explain how collaborarive leadership strategies are interrelated. 2. Describe different ways to build collaborative leadership skills.
-
An economist wishes to estimate the proportion of Americans who own a tablet with an Android operating system. What size sample should be obtained if she wishes the estimate to be within 3 percentage...
-
What are multinational corporations (MNCs) and what economic roles do they play?
-
As mentioned in the chapter, lawyers, creditors, and trustees can often be involved in bankruptcy fraud. Read the letter at www.clr.org/Safford6c04.html. It was written by a debtor to the U.S....
-
How is power used to influence another person to participate in an already existing fraud scheme?
-
What is fraud?
-
Because the _________ leads to the production of more than the efficient level of output, a(n) _________ results.
-
The size of the deadweight loss from a tax, as well as how the burdens are shared between buyers and sellers, depends on the relative _________.
-
Market economies largely rely on a(n) _________ decision- making process, where literally millions of individual producers and consumers of goods and services determine what will be produced.
Study smarter with the SolutionInn App