"Perhaps the government could begin to release parts of the spectrum to a commons model to test the viability," he says. "Perhaps part for experimentation and other parts for actual use. Over time, this would provide enough experience to see if opening the spectrum is effective or if a mixed approach is better. At which point, the idea can be extended or reduced."

The concept of a spectrum or wireless commons has taken off overseas.

"We believe there is value to an independent and global network which is open to the public," the Manifesto outlines. "We will break down commercial, technical, social and political barriers to the commons. The wireless commons bridges one of the few remaining gaps in universal communication without interference from middlemen and meddlers."

What defines a community wireless network is still in flux, the organisation says. "Many different people and groups are trying to solve the problems in different ways. Approaches range from sharing out no-cost Internet access with stand-alone wireless hotspots to building citywide wireless networks which are entirely separate from the Internet. Only time will tell what is the most effective approach to building a community wireless network."

"We are on the verge of being able to connect to anyone and everyone, whenever and however we want," he continues. "No gatekeepers. Ubiquitous connection. Connectedness that`s always there and always on."

Weinberger adds, "in this context, spectrum has nothing to do with electromagnetic waves and auctions. It is far more fundamental: Spectrum is connection."

Drawing on those sources, DotBlog`s Giles believes there is very little flexibility in the current model which considers spectrum as a scarce resource. "Innovations such as WiFi show that there is huge potential in a new way of thinking."

"Currently, the way in which we auction spectrum is like asking motorists to apply each year for a particular time slot on a particular bit of freeway," he says. "So that they can get to work. You can see that quite quickly large corporations with vast amounts of money would out bid individuals and corner the market. Then the only way for you to get to work would be to jump on private mass transit systems."

"That`s very inflexible," Giles continues, "and means that you wouldn`t be able to choose how and when you would get there. Not only that, you wouldn`t see innovation in producing scooters, motorbikes, four wheel drives and sports cars."

A more open spectrum regime would encourage greater innovation and benefit Australia`s dispersed population that often makes communications difficult, he says.

Giles is getting together a group of interested people to collaboratively write a letter to the government. The ACA has also asked for workshop suggestions to be conducted this year.

"WiFi, a technology that uses a small part of the spectrum," Giles details in his blog, "has shown just how much can happen when a part of the spectrum is opened. WiFi used radio frequencies that do no require a license. The recent boom in deployment and talk of home users going as far as creating free community networks is a great illustration of innovation."

Giles believes recent technology challenges historical thinking that spectrum is limited. "Some studies show that it becomes less limited the greater the number of users. With new technology, such as Spread Spectrum or Software Radios, a great deal more people can use the spectrum. Perhaps it is time for a change."

"The way we think of using the spectrum is based on old thinking," Giles explains. "There is interference from other devices that use the same frequency. But with the increased computational power that we have in our work, lounge, or even hands today, we can start to use software to manage the traffic. The cost of this power has come down dramatically since we started using radio."

Firstly, the first metaphor treats spectrum as if it were a pipe. However, spectrum is not a pipe with a measurable capacity. The analogy assumes that water can`t be compressed effectively and only one stream of water can pass through a pipe at any one time.

Secondly, "the second [interference] metaphor thinks of the electromagnetic energy as waves that can be deformed by interference. In fact, electromagnetic waves can pass through one another without distortion."

"The third metaphor thinks of wireless communications devices as consumers of bandwidth," Weinberger continues. "Every time a broadcaster receives a license, the amount of available spectrum goes down. Spectrum is not only a finite resource, it is a scarce resource, at least according to this metaphor. New technology, however, increases bandwidth with the number of users."

Those three metaphors dovetail into the fourth. Broadcasters are given exclusive access rights because spectrum is considered finite.

New technologies challenge those metaphors, according to Weinberger. These include spread spectrum and information theory, as proposed by Shannon.

"Open spectrum will do for wireless communications what the Internet has done for networking computers," he concludes.

In June last year, the spectrum regulator announced the formation of a Spectrum Policy Task Force to evaluate new ways of increasing the public benefits of radio spectrum.

Last November, they presented recommendations to modernise the rules and move from a "traditional government `command and control` model to a more flexible, consumer-oriented approach."

In particular, FCC proposes a shift to exclusive and commons models. "While the command-and-control model currently dominates today`s policy, the Task Force recommends altering the balance to provide greater use of both the exclusive use and commons models throughout the radio spectrum and limiting the use of the command-and-control model to those instances where there are compelling public policy reasons, such as some public safety applications."

Closer to home, Giles has received limited response to his calls. But he "blames this slowness on the small amount of Australian hits that my blog receives, and also the lack of publicity that a Wireless Commons has had in Australia. Few people understand the possibilities that innovation could bring to the way we live our lives if we simply encourage the Government to release frequencies."