The question of Wi-Fi and real estate is about to come to a head, at Boston's Logan Airport. (Picture from MIT.)

Declan McCullagh reports that the Airport is trying to close Continental Air's free WiFi service, based in its Frequent Flyer lounge, in favor of a paid service on which it gets a 20% cut of revenue.

Continental has appealed to the FCC under the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Massport, which runs the airport, is making bogus arguments about security (its paid service uses the same spectrum as Continental so if one goes under its argument, both go).

If this thing goes to trial it will be a very important case. Here's why.

At issue is whether a renter can control the radio environment of their property during the terms of the lease.

My guess is this isn't specified in Massport's present contracts. They might bring it up at renewal, even make it a binding take-it-of-leave-it demand. But the question then becomes, could that be enforceable?

If it is, if it's illegal for a renter to put out a radio signal on their property, then all sorts of other things become possible:

• Apartment complexes can turn-off wireless LANs in their complexes.
  
• Office complexes can turn-off wireless LANs run by tenants.
  
• Always-On applications run by renters could all be turned off.
  

Essentially the right to run a radio becomes a property right, one controlled by the real estate owner (as opposed to the person in control of the real estate).

I don't necessarily want this one to go to court right now, because I'm afraid of what the ideologues might say. And it would not be a good decision for physics.