The satellite space race and the future of regulation

What distinguishes Fixed Satellite Services (FSS) from Mobile Satellite Services (MSS), and why is this relevant for regulators?

FSS provides stationary connections, typically for broadband, while MSS covers mobile connections such as Direct-to-Device (D2D) and satellite IoT. Regulators must evaluate how much these services may substitute for terrestrial broadband or mobile services, as this affects market definitions in ex-ante market reviews.

From a spectrum perspective, why should D2D not include IoT?

Direct-to-Device (D2D) and IoT might both connect devices, but their spectral needs are worlds apart. IoT signals, like NB-IoT, thrive in tiny, narrow channels designed for thousands of low-power devices. D2D, on the other hand, demands wide 5G NTN channels to handle voice, video, and high-speed data. Mixing them would waste spectrum, risk interference, and create unreliable connections. Keeping them separate ensures both services run efficiently, reliably, and within regulatory bounds.

What challenges arise when satellite operators attempt to use terrestrial mobile spectrum?

ITU Radio Regulation 4.4 prohibits assigning spectrum already allocated for terrestrial mobile services. Using these bands could cause interference in terrestrial networks or other satellites. Since standardized protections are lacking, operational oversight by national regulators using provisional IMT terrestrial assignments for satellite is essential.

How do WRC-27 agenda items affect MSS and D2D development?

Agenda Items (A.I) 1.12 and 1.14 consider additional spectrum for low-data-rate (LDR) and wideband MSS respectively. Whereas satellite IoT will likely have access to some of the corresponding LDR bands post WRC-27 and as well as other bands, there are no FDD MSS D2D bands on the table for WRC-27, meaning demand for L & S MSS bands will increase. In some countries there is still capacity but in the USA these bands are almost fully utilized. Consequently, D2D satellite operators will place increased focus on enabling satellite use in terrestrial IMT bands per A.I 1.13. in countries where MSS capacity is not available.

How do spectrum fees differ internationally for satellite operators?

Some countries, like the USA, use fees to cover regulatory costs, while others treat fees as incentives, which implies the fees also function as a form of tax – if not used to fund the regulator. The EU lacks a uniform fee approach; Member States set up their own policies. Whether the EU’s Digital Networks Act, when finalized, will address this remains to be seen. NGSO constellations require new fee models to encourage market entry while avoiding investment deterrence, while regulators need to be clear on the fee model they have adopted.

What strategic challenge do D2D services pose for national mobile operators?

D2D can complement or compete with mobile networks. Satellite operators might offer mobile services without full regulatory obligations, such as emergency call support. National mobile operators must decide whether to cooperate or lobby against satellite D2D deployments.

What is the current state of D2D deployments globally?

D2D has launched in 14 countries, e.g., Starlink & T-Mobile USA and Apple & Globalstar USA. India conducted a trial that was criticized for lack of transparency and non-neutral technology. Most D2D offerings follow a roadmap: emergency messages → text → voice → video.

How is the international LEO satellite competition developing?

Since its launch in May 2019, Starlink has pioneered the era of LEO satellites for broadband, D2D and IoT communications. A large part of Starlink’s success is attributable to its parent company SpaceX, and their success in lowering the cost/kg in space through re-usable rocket technology.

How does Detecon define “Sovereign Satellite Constellations”?

A sovereign constellation should meet at least two of our three criteria: 1) military communication or EO use, 2) government funding/secure communications, and/or 3) potential use in conflict zones.
Sovereign straddles between fully military and national flagship constellations in our view. Sovereignty can also imply extraterritorial influence.

How should states regulate foreign satellite access to their domestic markets?

Countries may restrict access based on satellite operator origin, like high-risk vendor bans in the EU. The EU Space Act and e-certification requirements aim to ensure transparency, compliance, and national security. Other countries have similar regulations on foreign satellites.

What significant satellite-related events in the past year have illustrated the challenges of sovereignty and regulatory compliance?

In 2025, SpaceX’s Starlink highlighted the complex intersection of commercial operations and sovereignty. Starlink enabled service in Ukraine during the ongoing conflict, even though its terms of service prohibit military use. At the same time, Starlink terminals were operated illegally in Iran, prompting the Iranian government to appeal to the ITU, which ruled in Iran’s favor.

What is the significance of satellite licensing, gateway rights, and what recent satellite events reveal the limits of current regulatory frameworks?

Operators require at least one more license to operate in a country, depending on the nature of operators and the types of licenses required by each jurisdiction. Some regulators combine bundle satellite and gateway rights, while others separate them. The type of licenses offered reflects the national thinking towards satellite operators on how satellite operators participate in national digital economies.

TDRA UAE launched a consultation for satellite resellers. This is against a backdrop where the original satellite licenses offered are vertically integrated, and only telco operators are licensed to resell satellite services. TDRA is proposing to issue its first-class B type license.

CRA Qatar has closed its consultation on fees applicable to holders of spectrum rights, including satellite operators. Issues address in that consultation include the pricing for Q/V and E-band satellite feeder links, as well as spectrum pricing for MSS satellite and D2D services. Most other GCC countries have not addressed the pricing of the D2D spectrum yet.

CST Saudi Arabia consulted on the potential benefits, challenges and key considerations on providing D2D in MSS and IMT frequencies, while TRA Bahrain had a similar consultation culminating in the launch of D2D services.

Conclusion

Looking ahead, the evolving satellite landscape over fixed broadband, satellite IoT and Direct to Device has several regulatory domains which require attention such as foreign satellite licensing, D2D regulatory frameworks, and spectrum fees. Countries will seek to balance their sovereignty vs. requirements for foreign investment for the development of their digital economies. Earth-Stations-in-Motion place additional demands for regional coordination.

Success will hinge on balancing innovation, market entry, and security while ensuring fair competition and effective spectrum use. How regulators and operators navigate these intertwined challenges will shape the future of global satellite communications and determine which markets and technologies will thrive in the coming decade.