If you go over and look at the docket for this week's filings in the FCC's "white spaces" proceeding, you'll find this:

1.  Microsoft says the Commission tested a broken device, and never even tried the (functioning) backup device or called up Microsoft to find out why the heck the thing wasn't working:

In the presence of FCC engineers, Microsoft engineers tested the Prototype A device used by [FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology] for the DTV signal testing. This test revealed that the scanner in the device had been damaged and operated at a severely degraded level....

• Microsoft testing conducted in the presence of FCC engineers also revealed that the spare Prototype A device previously provided to the FCC Laboratory (which was in the FCC’s possession throughout the testing process) reliably detected occupied television channels at -114 dBm.

• OET staff acknowledged that they did not attempt to contact Microsoft after observing the performance of the damaged Prototype A device tested by OET, nor did OET use the spare/backup Prototype A device provided to it for any portion of its DTV signal testing.

2.  Philips Electronics North America reminds the Commission that its prototype device was very good at sensing DTV signals and wireless microphones:

In analyzing the test results, it is essential to bear in mind the purpose of this prototype testing. It is not for equipment authorization. We are not yet at that stage in the process. The sole purpose is to test the feasibility of operating unlicensed [White Spaces Devices] without causing harmful interference, of which consistent and robust detection is a significant part. Viewed from that perspective, all parties should view the testing of [the Philips device] as a success.

3.  Meanwhile, the cable industry's trade association group bravely tells the FCC that even though the Commission tested a broken device, the results of the tests "validate the concerns expressed by the cable industry and other parties regarding the substantial risks of wide-scale interference from unlicensed devices and the inadequacy of the signal sensing detection mechanism incorporated in prototype devices."

Watch for both cable and broadcasters to get very up-in-arms about protecting wireless microphones.  If we get this wrong, planes will fall from the sky!

Low-powered wireless microphones are essential to television journalists covering breaking news events, particularly on-the-scene coverage of emergency situations. And they are ubiquitous tools for the distribution of audio in all major sports and entertainment events in large venues.

4.  A technical director for a church in Reno has this to say:

I would ask that your discussions and decisions keep in mind the thousands of churches across the country who rely on wireless technology to communicate messages of hope, encouragement, and love to millions of people every week.

5. Motorola chimes in, saying personal/portable devices could use geolocation information to avoid interference, and encourages the FCC to do more testing.

6.  And the Community Broadcasters Association says that it

believes that the [FCC] report validates its position that any White Space operations must be limited to operations at fixed locations that are held accountable through licensing; and if any personal portable devices are allowed, their frequency selection must be controlled by a licensed centralized beacon that relies on not only sensitive spectrum sensing but also a database that requires exclusion of all broadcast signals expected to reach the user’s location.

That's just three days of filings.  We've got a broken prototype being seriously tested by murmuring, clucking-with-concern engineers, immense security-plus-prayer concerns about wireless microphones, and a call for no unlicensed uses at all -- much less the unlicensed, portable uses that would make a new opportunistic market for basic ubiquitous internet access possible. You can't make this stuff up.

[I couldn't resist this.  I promise CALEA tomorrow.]