I'm sure like everything else there are various opinions on this, at least I haven't found anything definitive. Curious what you randos think.
I read in some presentation (can't remember the author) that spectrum rights would just be like land rights: the first person to broadcast on a frequency (appropriate the frequency) over a specific area has claimed stake on that frequency and owns it until abandoned/transferred. I see many limitations to that approach, technical and practical.
Well, during the radio era, before the government came in and regulated everything, a series of court cases seemed to be converging on a spectrum property rights system. However, one thing that really caught my attention is the unregulated wifi spectrum. There is absolutely no property rights is certain parts of this spectrum, but rather than go to hell like a tragedy of the commons, radical and rapid innovation happened in this space, and the market worked it out without any government or court interference at all.
Also, another issue is just the physics of it. RF is just modulated photons, in the radio spectrum instead of the optical light spectrum. If I have a flash-light, and you have a flash-light, and we shine them in a way that crosses paths, anybody with a little bit of sense would determine that your light is not stopping me from shining my light, or stopping people from seeing my light. The issue is always the position and the sensitivity of the person receiving the light signal. None of the information is lost.
I suspect that even if we had an frequency modulation property rights system, strong market incentives to make the most of this spectrum would eventually converge on systems that most efficient use of the spectrum anyhow. It's only when you have bullshit regulations that inherent inefficiencies pop up.
Some good points. Like many things we really don't know until we get the state out of the way and let the market decide, but it's fun to speculate. I need to look into the history of WiFi. This was my first post so thanks for the detailed answer.