The unlicensed bands are some of the busiest radio spectrum on Earth. The 2.4 GHz band alone carries Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Zigbee, cordless peripherals, baby monitors, industrial sensors and countless IoT devices. Anyone can build equipment for these bands without buying a licence, provided they follow the rules on power and emissions. That openness is why they became home to so much of the connected world.
Now the US Federal Communications Commission wants to extend them into space. On 6 August 2026, the FCC adopted a proposal that would allow devices operating under its unlicensed rules to communicate directly with satellites in parts of the 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz bands. If adopted, a Bluetooth tag or Wi-Fi sensor could, in principle, send data to a satellite passing overhead using the same radio it already uses on the ground.
The idea has obvious appeal for IoT. It also runs into a basic problem: the bands are crowded, the rules were written for short-range devices, and a satellite beam covers a very large area. IoT Business News framed the debate as a question of whether this is a new connectivity model or an interference problem. The answer may be both.
What The FCC Proposed
The proposal is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled “Unleashing Unlicensed Spectrum for Direct-to-Device,” in ET Docket No. 26-169. It was published in the Federal Register on 8 September 2026. Comments are due by 9 November, and reply comments by 7 December.
Two Bands
The FCC proposes adding satellite allocations in two unlicensed bands: 2400 to 2483.5 MHz, widely used for Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, and 5725 to 5850 MHz, part of the spectrum used for Wi-Fi. The Commission explained that it limited the proposal to these bands because unlicensed devices can already operate there at up to 4 watts of effective radiated power, and because the bands currently have almost no satellite allocations.
The 902 to 928 MHz band, which carries LoRa and other long-range IoT technologies in the United States, is not part of the proposal.
No New Power For Devices
A central feature is what the FCC does not propose. The notice states: “We propose no increase in the maximum permissible power or antenna gain, and no changes to any of the other technical rules that apply to unlicensed devices in these bands.”
In other words, devices would talk to satellites using the same power they already use on the ground. The burden of making the link work would fall on the satellite, which would need sensitive antennas to pick up weak signals from hundreds of kilometres away.
Uplink First, Downlink In Question
The clearest part of the proposal covers uplink, from devices on Earth to satellites in space. Satellites would operate on a non-interference basis: they could not cause harmful interference to existing users, and they would have to accept interference from them.
Downlink, from satellites back to devices, is more contested. According to Davis Wright Tremaine’s summary of the adopted notice, the FCC seeks comment on whether downlinks are feasible, with the 5.8 GHz band identified as a possible candidate, and raises concerns about interference to Wi-Fi, IoT and other unlicensed operations.
The Rationale
The FCC’s argument is about reach and spectrum shortage. The notice says the change “would enable billions of existing devices that comply with the part 15 unlicensed rules using protocols such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to connect to satellites using existing communication protocols.” It points to more than $40 billion of investment in direct-to-device services over eighteen months and to the continuing gaps in rural connectivity.
Why It Appeals To IoT
For IoT, the proposal could open a new route to global coverage that does not depend on cellular networks or dedicated satellite modems.
Billions Of Radios Already In The Field
Bluetooth Low Energy chips are among the cheapest and most power-efficient radios available, and they are built into billions of devices. If a small, low-cost Bluetooth tag can reach a satellite, trackers for pallets, containers, tools, livestock and equipment could report their location from almost anywhere, without a gateway nearby and without a cellular subscription.
We covered the trade-offs between low-power networks in our guide to the networks built to whisper. Unlicensed satellite links would add another option at the lowest end of cost and power.
Proof That It Can Work
This is not purely theoretical. Hubble Network, a US start-up co-founded by Alex Haro, a co-founder of Life360, and Ben Wild, has been demonstrating Bluetooth-to-satellite connectivity. SatNews reported in March that the company operated seven satellites and planned to reach 60 by 2028. Its satellites use phased-array antennas to detect Bluetooth signals from more than 600 kilometres away, and it works with chips from Silicon Labs and Texas Instruments.
Messages are tiny, up to 13 bytes, and coverage is currently at least once every 24 hours, with more frequent passes planned. Hubble says devices can run for several years on a coin cell battery. The company has raised about $100 million.
In June 2026, the FCC granted Hubble a special temporary authority to operate unlicensed-compliant devices communicating with its satellites in a narrow slice at the top of the 2.4 GHz band. The new rulemaking would move from case-by-case permissions like this towards a general framework.
Europe Has Taken A Similar Path
The FCC notes that Europe has moved in a comparable direction. Its notice refers to a decision by the European Electronic Communications Committee setting out conditions under which low-power devices in the 862 to 870 MHz band may communicate with satellites. That band is used for LoRa and other short-range devices in Europe, and satellite LoRa services have been developed around it.
Why Interference Is The Central Problem
The same features that make unlicensed bands attractive make satellite use of them difficult.
A Crowded Neighbourhood
The 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz bands are shared by a very large number of devices, most operating with no coordination beyond simple rules. Wi-Fi networks in homes and offices, industrial wireless systems, Bluetooth accessories and IoT sensors all compete for the same airwaves. According to IoT Business News, the proposal touches 208.5 MHz of spectrum already heavily used by terrestrial devices.
A Satellite Sees A Continent
For uplink, the concern is less about individual devices than about aggregate effects. A satellite does not hear one device; it hears everything transmitting in its footprint. That can make it hard for the satellite to pick out a weak signal, and it means satellite systems must be designed to work amid heavy background noise.
For downlink, the concern flips. IoT Business News noted that “a single beam can illuminate a much larger area than a terrestrial access point.” A satellite transmitting in a Wi-Fi band could add noise across a region rather than a single room, potentially affecting many networks at once. That is why the FCC has not proposed downlink directly and is seeking comment instead.
Physics Works Against It
Distance is the other challenge. IoT Business News estimated path loss of about 150 dB at 300 kilometres in the 2.4 GHz band, meaning the signal reaching the satellite is extremely weak. Satellites also move quickly across the sky, which causes Doppler shifts in frequency and limits how long a device can see each satellite. Protocols designed for short-range links were not built for these conditions.
Protecting Other Users
The FCC also asks about protecting specific services. The notice raises concerns about radio astronomy observations in the 2.4 GHz band and asks whether operations aboard aircraft or drones should be prohibited.
The Safeguards Under Discussion
The FCC’s notice and industry commentary point to several tools that could manage the risks.
Power flux density limits would cap how much energy a satellite could deliver to the ground in a given area, limiting interference from any downlink. The FCC notes that Europe uses similar limits for satellite transmissions in the 862 to 870 MHz band.
Beam footprint limits would restrict how large an area each satellite beam could cover.
Aggregate limits would address the combined effect of several constellations operating in the same band.
Contention-based access, such as listen-before-talk, would require systems to check whether a channel is busy before transmitting.
Out-of-band emission limits would stop satellite signals spilling into neighbouring bands.
Geographic exclusions could protect sensitive sites, such as radio telescopes.
Which of these the FCC adopts, and how strictly, will decide how useful the new rules are in practice.
What It Would And Would Not Replace
Even if the rules are adopted, unlicensed satellite links are unlikely to replace other satellite IoT options.
Suited To Small, Delay-Tolerant Data
The most realistic uses involve small messages that can tolerate delay: a location ping, a temperature reading, a status update or an alarm. IoT Business News described the model as best suited to “delay-tolerant” applications such as periodic sensor readings. We looked at how trackers work with little or no power in our story on tracking assets that have no power.
Battery Life Trade-Offs
Reaching a satellite is harder than reaching a nearby gateway or phone. Devices may need to transmit more often, retry failed messages or search for passing satellites, all of which use energy. IoT Business News noted that attempting to reach a satellite “could increase energy use and reduce battery life.” Hubble’s claims of multi-year coin cell operation depend on sending very small, infrequent messages.
Alongside Cellular NTN
Standards-based cellular satellite services, such as NB-IoT over satellite, offer more data, two-way communication and operator-grade service levels, at higher cost and power. Proprietary satellite IoT networks serve specialised markets with their own terminals. Unlicensed satellite links would sit at the bottom of this range: lowest cost, lowest power, smallest messages, fewest guarantees. For many applications, that is exactly enough.
Who Gains And Who Worries
The proposal creates clear winners and clear sceptics.
Companies building Bluetooth and Wi-Fi-band satellite services stand to gain a clearer legal path. Chipmakers could see new demand for low-power radios marketed as satellite-capable. Device makers could add global coverage to cheap trackers without redesigning their radios.
Users of the bands have reasons for caution. Wi-Fi networks, industrial wireless systems and other unlicensed users depend on the bands staying usable, and the interference questions raised in the notice will be closely examined in the comments. Radio astronomers have specific concerns in the 2.4 GHz band. Satellite operators with licensed spectrum may also question whether unlicensed satellite services compete on fair terms.
What IoT Teams Should Watch
The rulemaking is at an early stage, and the final rules could differ considerably from the proposal. A few points will matter most for IoT.
Whether downlink is allowed will decide if unlicensed satellite links can support two-way communication, such as acknowledgements and remote commands, or only one-way reporting.
The technical limits, particularly on aggregate interference and beam footprints, will shape how many satellite operators can use the bands and how much capacity each can offer.
Equipment rules will matter for device makers. The FCC has proposed that devices meeting existing unlicensed requirements would not need additional testing for satellite use, which would make adoption much easier.
International alignment will affect global products. The US bands differ from Europe’s approach in the 862 to 870 MHz band, and devices sold worldwide will need to handle different rules in different markets.
For companies with an interest in the outcome, the comment period running to 9 November is the moment to put technical evidence on the record.
An Open Door, With Conditions
The FCC’s proposal would do something unusual: open spectrum built for short-range, uncoordinated devices to links that span hundreds of kilometres. For IoT, the promise is real. Billions of cheap, low-power radios could gain a path to satellites without new hardware, new licences or new subscriptions.
The risks are real too. The bands are crowded, the physics is demanding and interference from space affects wide areas at once. Whether this becomes a new layer of IoT connectivity or a source of friction will depend on the technical rules that emerge from the comments, and on whether early services like Hubble’s can show they work without disturbing the devices already there.
