Spectrum

 

Many regulators need to accommodate Machine to Machine (M2M) and Internet of Things (IoT) within regimes that closely control wireless spectrum. Many IoT devices operate across a range of frequencies and scan for unused bands. In a smart city, increasing density of smart and IoT devices could result in a degradation of experience and performance.

Connecting as many devices as possible to fibre networks is part of the solution, although this is potentially complicated with step-by-step rollouts or older infrastructure. In these cases, wireless is a flexible complement to fibre. One solution to interference and data integrity issues is a ‘kill switch’ that allows regulators to disconnect offending IoT devices. However, this brings the question when and how use is warranted - especially because IoT is becoming increasingly important to critical systems, from traffic safety to healthcare. There’s no ‘one size fits all’ approach. UK regulator Ofcom prohibits use of channels considered most likely to risk interference - thereby ruling out use of potentially important spectrum. Operators in some jurisdictions in the Gulf run high power WiFi - even though it is illegal.

 

 

Product liability

 

Until dedicated legislation arrives, certain questions have to be dealt with by applying existing principles and causes of action. Who is responsible if a self-driving car causes death or injury, or a wearable device fails to administer medication following a regulatory intervention or a data breach? In dealing with new challenges, courts and regulators often have to reach for the legal tools from earlier stages that provide the closest analogies.

 

 

Data ownership, processing, use and security

 

Who is responsible for data gathered and stored on your movements, activities and personal information? In Europe, much attention is being paid to new data laws extending duties to cloud service providers. These are expected to be copied in other jurisdictions.

 

As smart city projects are frequently financed through commercial partnerships and public-private joint ventures the question arises: how far is private sector involvement driven by the potential value of data? The cost of smart city infrastructure is significant. Civil works in a brownfield FTTH/B deployment could theoretically be amortised by more than operator revenues. Municipalities also need to compete to attract investments, which could affect data integrity and security.

 

 

Contract structures

 

The coming together of public and private entities and the meshing of young technology with old infrastructure in commercial partnerships and public-private joint ventures can create challenging relationships. Multiple service and system suppliers may be involved in the development, testing and implementation of solutions whilst interfacing with existing infrastructure. This may create a risk of potential gaps in legal responsibilities. Working with consortia and multi-sourcing models, and taking new approaches to procurement can help develop new, matrix-based models of cooperation and shared responsibility.

 

 

Overview

 

The legal and practical issues affecting smart city projects and IoT implementation touch communications law and regulation, data law, commercial contracts, tort and product liability, administrative and even constitutional law. Further, they require close attention to questions of jurisdiction, governing law and cross-border liability and enforcement. What’s more, globalisation of data services requires understanding of issues in every relevant jurisdiction.

Framework approach

 

The complexity and interconnectedness of the different elements in a smart city means they cannot be managed separately. Nor can they be considered in isolation. An overall framework approach needs to be taken to ensure that efforts are coordinated, issues are identified across boundaries and solutions are found before they become crises.