The Marriott International is an American diversified hospitality company that manages and franchises a broad portfolio of hotels and related lodging facilities. It is the largest hotel company with more than 4,087 properties in over 80 countries and territories around the world, so you would think that its profit margin is quite high.
In general, one of the selling points that hotels, motels and convention centers offer its customers is free access to Wi-Fi connections. Since most people need to stay connected, offering this free service, with fast connection speeds could help you decide where to stay.
Apparently, that is not the case with the Marriott. At least it is not the case with the Marriott's Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center. The Marriott has been fined $600,000 by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for disabling its guests' personal Wi-Fi hotspots. This act has forced them to use the hotel's expensive network instead.
Marriott's Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center in Nashville has only been operating for about two years, however, it does seem that this practice has been going on for just as long. While hotel guests and convention center attendees noticed that something was wrong, it wasn’t until March 2013 that someone registered a complaint, which is when one of the guests warned the FCC that they suspected their hotspot was being jammed.
According to a senior FCC official with knowledge of the investigation, this represents the first time that the FCC has investigated a hotel property for blocking its guests' Wi-Fi. The FCC determined that the Marriott’s blocking of hotspots is not jamming as you would think of it in the normal sense. It seems that Marriott employees were using the hotel's own Wi-Fi system to block other people's hotspots. The system was not just blocking outside hotspots, it was also not allowing guests to use their own smartphones as personal hotspots.
The FCC said that employees at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center disabled Wi-Fi networks established by consumers at its conference facilities. They installed some mystery equipment and configured it to continually flood the surrounding airwaves with de-authentication packets. They then charged guests between $250 and $1,000 per device for access to the hotel network. The investigation found that employees used features of a Wi-Fi monitoring system to contain and/or de-authenticate guest-created Wi-Fi hotspot access points in the conference facilities.
The Wi-Fi monitoring system would target access points with de-authentication packets, disconnecting users so that their browsing was interrupted. This made it so that the hotel hotspots were the only ones that its guests’ devices would recognize and access. In this scenario, an attacker does not have to know a Wi-Fi network's password, or be authenticated in any way, to send a successful de-authentication packet. All devices and computers that receive the management frame over the air are instructed to disassociate from their network.
The FCC has fined Marriott $600,000 for the practice, determining that this is in violation of the right for individuals to take advantage of their own connectivity. While the Marriott hotel didn't jam signals, which is an actual violation of law, it used its network hardware so that the hotel hotspots were the only ones that guest devices could see and access.
In a statement, FCC Enforcement Bureau Chief Travis LeBlanc said, "Consumers who purchase cellular data plans should be able to use them without fear that their personal Internet connection will be blocked by their hotel or conference center. It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal hot spots while also charging consumers and small businesses high fees to use the hotel's Wi-Fi network. This practice puts consumers in the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or forgoing Internet access altogether."
Under the FCC consent decree, Marriott must not block guests' Wi-Fi at all of the properties it owns and manages. The company must also file compliance plans with the FCC every three months for three years. In response, the Marriott defended its actions by issuing the following statement:
"Marriott has a strong interest in ensuring that when our guests use our Wi-Fi service, they will be protected from rogue wireless hot spots that can cause degraded service, insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft. Like many other institutions and companies in a wide variety of industries, including hospitals and universities, the Gaylord Opryland protected its Wi-Fi network by using FCC-authorized equipment provided by well-known, reputable manufacturers.”
"We believe that the Opryland's actions were lawful. We will continue to encourage the FCC to pursue a rulemaking in order to eliminate the ongoing confusion resulting from today's action and to assess the merits of its underlying policy."
Benet Wilson, blogs about travel at AviationQueen.com, he said “Blocking a traveler's personal Wi-Fi will only serve to aggravate hotel guests further. Travelers are already annoyed that higher-end hotels continue to charge for subpar Wi-Fi, which is why they bring their own. So it's really galling when you hear of a company like Marriott, which has a good reputation that does something that causes a major inconvenience to its customers. And the fact that they profited off of their customers in such a blatant way also doesn't help."
Whether it is for work or personal social media reasons, we live in a world where we need to be connected all the time. We carry with us the ability to do just that, but when it is taken away from you, forcing you to pay for a service that you do not need, that is definitely something to complain about.
Edited by
Maurice Nagle 
QUICK LINKS 
