It’s official: current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski will be handing over the gavel on May 17th. While Commissioner Mignon Clyburn will lead the agency until Obama nominee Tom Wheeler gets confirmed and sworn in, it’s worth taking a look at the top two pressing issues Wheeler will face once he takes the helm of the Commission.
Agenda Item: IP Transition
The trend is undeniable. Americans are leaving their traditional phone service, dropping their standard connection in favor of wireless and IP-based phone connections. You’re probably one of them. If you have your home phone service bundled with cable, you might not even realize you no longer rely on the plain old telephone service (POTS) network.
With scores of people changing the way they communicate (some estimates peg the number at 500,000 people each month), network providers want to gradually sunset their old networks so they can concentrate billions in investment dollars to new, Internet-based services. In other words, they want to put their money where consumers want to go … and are going.
This transition to all-IP (Internet Protocol) networks won’t be as easy as flipping a switch. Ensuring everyone still has a reliable connection, especially seniors and those living in rural areas, is critical. That’s why AT&T submitted a proposal to the FCC for “beta trials” in select markets to identify potential pitfalls, an idea FCC Commission Ajit Pai strongly endorsed in a speech sponsored by the Hudson Institute back in March. As Pai said in his speech:
Right now, the most critical choice we face is whether to move forward with an All-IP Pilot Program. This program would allow forward-looking companies to choose a discrete set of wire centers where they could turn off their old TDM electronics and migrate consumers to an all-IP platform. Now, you may have noticed that when it comes to the IP transition, everyone has a prediction about what will or will not happen if carriers are allowed to provide services exclusively through an all-IP platform. But as we found out during yesterday’s “snowstorm”—what we Kansans call “weather”—predictions are no substitute for hard facts. Albert Einstein had it right: A “pretty experiment is in itself often more valuable than twenty formulae extracted from our minds.”
Fortunately, we don’t need to rely on formulae any longer. The FCC has sought and received comments on a proposal to create an All-IP Pilot Program. I’ve reviewed the record carefully. And having done so, I am proposing today that the FCC move forward with this program.
Going forward with beta trials is just part of the greater IP transition discussion Wheeler will no doubt be having as head of the FCC. Also on the burner will be regulations — specifically, what will be the regulatory framework in an all-IP world? The 1996 Telecommunications Act is by all accounts painfully outdated. Modernizing rules to keep pace with today’s technology in ways that encourage continued investment in network infrastructure and protect consumers will be critical for the IP transition to succeed. And Wheeler, from the driver’s seat of the FCC, will need to lead the discussion.
Agenda Item: Spectrum
Outgoing Chairman Julius Genachowski deserves a ton of credit for recognizing the coming “spectrum crunch” (as he’s coined it), but the FCC’s proposed solution to the problem — incentive spectrum auctions — is barely past the 50-yard line. The auctions are still being shaped, the details still being argued over. Some are pushing for limited involvement in the auctions by certain wireless providers. Others question whether enough broadcasters will participate to make a difference.
Meanwhile, thousands of Americans are adopting mobile broadband every day. They are firing up smartphones and tablets for the first time and pushing data into the ether. And all that data is joining the bits and bytes being pushed out from tens of millions of other people who are already relying on a wireless connection to the Internet for their daily activities.
To keep up with this flood of data traveling on their networks, wireless providers have been trying to make deals for spectrum left and right. But it’s still not enough, which means a lot will be riding on the FCC’s spectrum auctions. Will Wheeler and the other Commissioners successfully put together proceedings that are open to all qualified bidders? Auctions that maximize much-needed revenue for the Federal government? As my colleague Rick Boucher succinctly put it:
Only through truly competitive, open spectrum auctions will America’s wireless industry continue to thrive. After all, the best way to ensure competition is to encourage everyone to compete.
These are the two most critical issues Wheeler will face once he’s in charge of the FCC (and underlying both of those issues is the most important part of his job — increasing access for all Americans to participate in the technological revolution we are experiencing. High-speed access to the Internet only increases in importance as job searches, entrepreneurial opportunities, education and health care are all enhanced by being online). While some have criticized his selection given his past life running both the NCTA and the CTIA, such experience offers encouragement that he has the ability to successfully get the job done. As President Obama remarked during the announcement of his selection:
”If anybody is wondering about Tom’s qualifications… [He] is the only member of both the cable television and the wireless industry hall of fame.”
Here’s hoping Wheeler will one day be inducted into the FCC hall of fame as well.
Speaking of the FCC, John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable has a short interview with outgoing Chairman Julius Genachowski. Here’s a taste, regarding the Commission’s upcoming spectrum auctions:
You mentioned incentive auctions. You are leaving with the incentive auctions still at the beginning of the process. What shape is it in?
In 2009, when I rang the alarm bell on a spectrum crunch, people said there was no spectrum crunch. In early 2010, when we introduced the incentive auction idea, people said that would never happen. The goals that I set out were to get the country focused on spectrum crunch, get the legislation passed and move forward on other steps to free up licensed and unlicensed spectrum. Things have moved much faster than anyone would have thought, and much more has gotten done than anyone would have predicted. Having said that, there are challenges ahead and they will be with us for a very long time. That is why one of the things I focused on was strengthening the agency so that it could continue to do the work of the American people for a very long time.
At his blog Maximum Entropy, Bret Swanson (who is one of our Broadband Ambassadors) writes about a recent op-ed from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in the Wall Street Journal:
Chairman Genachowski is right to herald the incentive auctions that could unleash hundreds of megahertz of un- and under-used spectrum from the old TV broadcasters. Yet wrangling over the rules of the auctions could stretch on, delaying the the process. Worse, the rules themselves could restrict who can bid on or buy new spectrum, effectively allowing the FCC to favor certain firms, technologies, or friends at the expense of the best spectrum allocation. We’ve seen before that centrally planned spectrum allocations don’t work. The fact that the FCC is contemplating such an approach is worrisome. It runs counter to the policies that led to today’s mobile success.
Swanson’s full post is worth checking out, as is a recent post from our own Bruce Mehlman on Genachowski’s spectrum vision..
In today’s Wall Street Journal, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski goes over the many steps the Commission is taking to free up more spectrum from wireless use. Calling broadband the “engine for economic growth,” he starts out his op-ed by backing up that statement:
To sustain long-term economic health, America needs growth engines, areas of the economy that hold real promise of major expansion. Few sectors have more job-creating innovation potential than broadband, particularly mobile broadband.
Genachowski then highlights how the U.S. now leads the world in 4G LTE deployment (along with the fact that private investment in mobile infrastructure is “more than 50% higher than in Europe”), but warns that in order to keep both deployment and investment happening, more airwaves are critical. As he writes:
Spectrum is finite, and the demand for airwaves being created by data-hungry, Internet-connected devices is on pace to exceed supply. How significant is the spike in demand? Today’s smartphones generate 50 times more mobile traffic than a traditional cellphone. For tablets, it’s 120 times more traffic. As a result, American wireless networks are running at the highest utilization rate of any in the world.
One solution to this problem, Genachowski tells readers of the Journal, is the Commission’s upcoming spectrum incentive auctions, which have the potential to both free up airwaves and deliver much needed revenue to the Federal Government. That’s potentially a win-win, as they say. But as our own Rick Boucher wrote this past February, the key to making the FCC’s initiative successful for consumers and the economy is ensuring spectrum auctions are open to all bidders. Boucher:
History has shown that when the FCC has tried to pick winners and losers in the wireless market, American consumers have lost. Past attempts by the Commission to favor certain bidders and/or impose rigid regulations on auction winners have drastically diminished auction proceeds, left major blocks of spectrum unused, and led to what FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski himself has labeled “America’s looming spectrum crisis.”
The simple truth is America’s wireless industry continues to be fiercely competitive… Allowing the FCC to impose conditions on spectrum auctions will not make the industry more competitive. And the spectrum critically needed by all providers to keep up with increasing demand will not be put to its full use, leading to spectrum shortages, reduced investment and innovation, and higher prices for consumers.
Only through truly competitive, open spectrum auctions will America’s wireless industry continue to thrive. After all, the best way to ensure competition is to encourage everyone to compete.
Genachowski and the entire FCC deserve praise for their tireless work to keep this critically important issue on the front burner. But given mobile broadband’s benefits — not just to consumers and the economy, but to communities, education, and the health care industry — ensuring spectrum incentive auctions are open to all those willing to make the substantial private investment to keep rapid deployment going should be at the top of the list. As Genachowski himself wrote in his op-ed:
Private-sector innovation in mobile broadband has been extraordinary. But maintaining the creative momentum in wireless networks, devices and apps will need an equally innovative wireless policy, or jobs and growth will be left on the table.
Speaking of incentive auctions, yesterday FCC Commission Jessica Rosenworcel spoke at a conference and laid out her vision for how the auctions should proceed. The National Journal‘s Juliana Gruenwald once again reports:
Rosenworcel, a Democrat who joined the five-member commission in May, outlined the proposal during a conference that examined spectrum policy over the next decade. She noted that meeting the nation’s spectrum needs will require a variety of approaches, including effective implementation of the incentive auction process by the FCC, technological solutions, and spectrum sharing.
She also echoed calls for federal agencies to give up more of their spectrum to commercial wireless providers. Noting that government agencies are understandably reluctant to surrender a network or communications system once it’s in place, she suggested giving agencies an incentive by offering them a share of the proceeds from the auction of the federal spectrum.
The National Journal‘s Juliana Gruenwald reports that with the FCC’s incentive auctions gearing up, a group of broadcasters has banded together to work with the Commission:
The Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition will press to obtain the best conditions for broadcasters as the FCC implements legislation passed in February that authorizes the use of incentive auctions to free up TV stations’ spectrum for use by wireless broadband providers.
According to John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable, the FCC’s chief is down with the idea:
FCC chairman Julius Genachowski Tuesday gave an “open, transparent and data-driven” shout-out to the new Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition, which is being organized by former broadcast exec and one time Association for Independent Television Stations president Preston Padden.
“Incentive auctions will offer significant opportunities for broadcasters—both those that will take advantage of a once in a lifetime financial opportunity, and those that will choose to continue to be a part of a healthy and diverse broadcast marketplace,” said the chairman in response to the creation of the coalition. “I welcome the participation of the new Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition in our rulemaking process as the Commission engages all stakeholders in a manner that is open, transparent and data-driven.”
Over at The Hill, Jennifer Martinez reports that when it comes freeing up more spectrum for wireless use, at least one FCC Commissioner says the FCC is all in on voluntary spectrum auctions:
Mignon Clyburn, a Democratic commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), expressed confidence in the agency’s ability to execute its ambitious plan to off auction television stations’ airwave licenses to cellular service providers during a C-SPAN interview.
“We have no plan B, there’s a plan A. We’re doing all that we can to make sure that there are market synergies, that there are market forces, that there are market opportunities that both the buyers and sellers can take advantage of,” Clyburn said during a taping of C-SPAN’s “The Communicators” program that will air Saturday.
In a speech at CTIA’s MobileCon on Wednesday, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai talked spectrum – specifically, what has worked (and not worked) in the government’s efforts to free up more airwaves for wireless use.
As many would expect from this Republican member of the Commission, Pai embraces the power of the free market when it comes to providers being able to meet consumer demand for more airwaves. He points out:
Historically, the FCC used comparative hearings — better known as “beauty contests” — or even lotteries to assign licenses. In other words, the agency either had to choose political favorites or leave it to chance — a lose-lose proposition.
The big change, Pai noted, came in 1993, when Congress — and President Clinton — authorized the auction process for spectrum. Calling this move a “win-win,” Pai said:
Not only do [auctions] allocate spectrum more efficiently, but they also have raised over $50 billion for the federal government.
For further proof, Pai focused on two previous auctions — one in 2006, the other 2008 — that together provided 142 MHz of spectrum for mobile broadband. And that boost in airwaves, Pai went on to say, has greatly benefited the U.S. as a whole:
How important have these auctions been? They are the main reason why the United States today leads the world in 4G deployment. Verizon Wireless is using the C-Block spectrum it obtained in [2008’s] Auction 73 to roll out 4G LTE service nationwide. AT&T provides 4G services over B-Block spectrum from Auction 73 as well as spectrum from [2006’s] Auction 2006. MetroPCS uses spectrum from Auction 66 to provide 4G LTE service. So does Leap Wireless. And soon, so will T-Mobile.
That’s obviously a lot of wireless expansion — not to mention a healthy boost to competition — from just two auctions, but as Pai himself noted there’s still much work to be done, especially when it comes to closing America’s digital divide. Wired broadband can only reach so many people before it becomes economically unfeasible. That means, if the U.S. is going to achieve the ambitious goal of bringing broadband to every corner of our nation, mobile broadband is the way to go.
According to Pai, the key to making it all happen is for the Commission to stay on the schedule it has already laid out for spectrum auctions. But he added:
I think three principles should [also] guide our work as we set up these auctions. Specifically, we must remain faithful to the legislation. We must be fair to all stakeholders. And we must keep our rules as simple as possible.
That’s exactly right, and I hope Pai and the Commission are able to take lessons from past successes to shape the role that the government should play going forward. Making the goals of the National Broadband Plan reality is simply too important — to the economic health of America, to the promise that everyone in our nation should have an opportunity to succeed — for us to fail. The future of broadband is up in the air, and it will take smart spectrum management and reallocation by the FCC to help tap mobile broadband’s full potential.
At Broadcasting & Cable, John Eggerton has an update on the FCC’s spectrum auction plans:
The FCC is going through “a whole bunch of edits and questions” from commissioners’ offices on the upcoming spectrum auction framework notice of proposed rulemaking, which is scheduled for a vote Friday, Sept. 28. Those questions include the wisdom of holding simultaneous auctions, as the FCC is proposing.
According to a source familiar with the edit chain, questions include whether the FCC is setting aside too much spectrum for unlicensed use, and whether it might make more sense to do the auctions sequentially.
Right now, the Commission is aiming to have auctions completed — and much-needed airwaves available for wireless use — by the end of 2014.
According to John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable, the FCC has released a model of what a spectrum auction could look like to interested parties:
The model is described as essentially a “tab A in slot B” description of the process, from reverse auction clock countdowns, to running the winning bids through the FCC’s modeling for reconfiguring that spectrum, to the spectrum’s re-auction to wireless, soliciting questions all along the way.
The model talks about cross-border spectrum arrangements and says there will probably have to be different rules for stations along the shared border with Canada and Mexico, seeking comment on what those should be.
Broadcasting & Cable’s John Eggerton has a good wrap-up of yesterday’s appearance by FCC Commissioners at the MMTC conference in Washington, DC. One major topic was the upcoming spectrum auctions:
FCC Commissioner Rosenworcel said Wednesday that upcoming incentive auctions would be a “big and innovative” undertaking. She emphasized that the auctions were voluntary and that broadcasters should have a full and fair opportunity to remain in the business.
As for other hot topics with the FCC, Eggerton reports:
Asked what issues were on the horizon for commission action, [Commissioner] Clyburn cited Universal Service Fund reform as something she was passionate about. Rosenworcel said the spectrum auctions were really important because they would grow the economy, particularly by spurring 4G mobile service growth. The agency should double down on those kinds of economy-growing efforts. She also put in a plug for getting to work on a first responder interoperable broadband network, which she promoted in her former job with the Senate Commerce Committee. She also said that broadband adoption and deployment are also double-down issues.
The full FCC is set to appear before the Senate Commerce Committee today, Broadcasting & Cable’s John Eggerton has a preview of what newly appointed Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel will say during the appearance:
According to a copy of those remarks, she will give a shout out to incentive auctions and the FCC’s history of delivering the goods—raising $50 billion for the treasury. She will also express confidecence that with the “right mix of engineering and economics,” the incentive auctions can follow in that tradition and, so long as the FCC follows the law, be “fair to all stakeholders.”
That law includes the requirement that broadcasters not be forced to participate.
At Daily Tech, Jason Mick talked with our own Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher on spectrum auctions and the potential for the FCC to exclude some bidder. As Mick writes:
[Boucher] praises Congress, saying that he thinks that they did a couple things right with the recent authorization. He states, “The FCC has been instructed by the Congress to develop a process for [carrying out] a spectrum auction…Congress correctly instructed the FCC not to disqualify from the incentive auction process any carriers based on their size or position in the mobile carrier market.”
But then the issue returns to the fear of potential discrimination via the spectrum screen—a provision design to protect against “inappropriate concentrations” of spectrum in the hands of a few holders in individual markets. While that provision may be legal to enforce in some cases, he suggests, he argues that overall, “We have antitrust laws that are designed to prevent undue concentration.”
Via CNet’s Roger Cheng, T-Mobile and Leap wireless have announced they are swapping some spectrum holdings in order to keep up with customer demand:
The deal is just the latest move by the wireless carriers to improve their various spectrum positions. By realigning their spectrum holdings, the carriers can build a network with better coverage, and potentially, better service. The transaction also signals the broader need for more spectrum in the wireless industry.
Since it takes years for wireless carriers to put newly attained spectrum to work — not to mention the fact that the FCC’s process for incentive auctions is only just now beginning — policy makers should let the market make moves like this one to help assuage the spectrum crunch.
In a post for The Hill‘s Congress Blog, our Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher warns of the “legislative black hole” when it comes to mobile broadband legislation:
If we are going to keep the wireless industry growing and encourage the build-out of a more powerful Fourth Generation wireless infrastructure across America, spectrum auctions must be properly designed. Rigging the system so that key stakeholders are barred or discouraged from participating, or spectrum availability is selectively curtailed, could cost our country billions in much-needed revenue and deal a severe blow to innovation from one of our most vibrant industries. A recent study from Deloitte Consulting estimates that deploying 4G networks across America could create as many as 771,000 jobs. That’s a lot of jobs, but it can only happen if wireless providers have the spectrum they need to power the networks they build.
Yesterday, the FCC announced the creation of a task force aimed at guiding upcoming spectrum auctions for wireless. As The Hill‘s Brendan Sasso reports:
In its first step toward implementing spectrum auctions authorized by Congress, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced a task force on Wednesday to study the issue.
Ruth Milkman, a special counsel to the agency’s chairman, will head the task force on an interim basis.
“I’m confident our staff is up to the challenge. What we’ll see is an implementation process that will be inclusive and participatory; that will be guided by the economics and the engineering; and that will seek to maximize the opportunity to unleash investment and innovation, benefit consumers, drive economic growth, and enhance our global competitiveness. When the incentive auction of the TV bands is complete, we expect to have a healthy broadcast sector, and a strong, robust, competitive, and world leading mobile industry.
Broadcasting & Cable’s John Eggerton reporting on a speech made by FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell yesterday at the Mobile World Congress event in Barcelona:
McDowell was not opposed to Congress limiting the FCC’s ability to condition the auction. He has long complained of the conditions on the FCC’s 2008 auction of the first tranche of broadcast spectrum reclaimed in the DTV transition. Those are widely believed to have discouraged bidders and reduced revenue from the auction.
“The lesson learned from that auction and others is that when governments attempt to conduct social and economic engineering by foisting unnecessarily complicated mandates on the use of spectrum, their efforts frequently backfire,” McDowell said. He said he thought the FCC could get it right this time.
Calls for humbler government are as old as the republic. In this era of frenzied media coverage and hyperpartisan dialogue, few would apply the humble label to anything related to the federal government. It’s time for at least one agency to heed the call.
As it writes rules for the availability of additional spectrum through incentive auctions, the Federal Communications Commission should apply a light touch — a truly humble approach — to the wireless sector, which is a major contributor to our national economic recovery.
Our Co-Chair Bruce Mehlman recently spoke with Web Pro News about the need for the FCC to conduct open and competitive spectrum auctions. Here’s video of the interview.
In a letter yesterday to 20 congressional leaders, a group of wireless providers led by Sprint and T-Mobile essentially called on Congress to grant the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) power to pick winners and losers in the wireless market. From the letter:
Congress’ challenge today is to authorize the FCC to conduct inventive auctions to bring additional spectrum to market while preserving the FCC’s ability to manage auction eligibility and structure to promote the benefits of vibrant wireless competition for consumers and the economy.
To this end, the letter argues the FCC should be able to take into account the amount of spectrum carriers have when it comes to crafting spectrum auction rules – in other words, not an open, competitive auction at all.
Given the unprecedented adoption of mobile broadband, the upcoming spectrum auctions are simply too important to limit the involvement of any bidder, be they large or small. The development of next-generation wireless services, and the ability of all carriers to obtain the necessary spectrum to improve service and keep up with customer demand, is critical not just for the health of the wireless industry, but for America’s economy.
While it’s not surprising that Sprint, T-Mobile, and other wireless providers would want to inhibit the nation’s two largest carriers from participating in full in spectrum auctions, doing so would severely limit the amount of revenue the government would receive in return for spectrum sold. Contrary to claims in the letter to Congress, the current House Bill (H.R. 3630) regarding spectrum auctions will ensure a level playing field continues to exist. It will also maximize auction proceeds, bringing American taxpayers the full benefit from the sale of one of our most vital public resources.
History has shown that when the FCC has tried to pick winners and losers in the wireless market, American consumers have lost. Past attempts by the Commission to favor certain bidders and/or impose rigid regulations on auction winners have drastically diminished auction proceeds, left major blocks of spectrum unused, and led to what FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski himself has labeled “America’s looming spectrum crisis.”
The simple truth is America’s wireless industry continues to be fiercely competitive (in fact, when it comes to spectrum holdings, letter signee Sprint is in arguably the best position due to its partnership with Clearwire). Allowing the FCC to impose conditions on spectrum auctions will not make the industry more competitive. And the spectrum critically needed by all providers to keep up with increasing demand will not be put to its full use, leading to spectrum shortages, reduced investment and innovation, and higher prices for consumers.
Only through truly competitive, open spectrum auctions will America’s wireless industry continue to thrive. After all, the best way to ensure competition is to encourage everyone to compete.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN USER AND Internet Innovation Alliance
The Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site is comprised of various Web pages operated by Internet Innovation Alliance.
The Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site is offered to you conditioned on your acceptance without modification of the terms, conditions, and notices contained herein. Your use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site constitutes your agreement to all such terms, conditions, and notices.
MODIFICATION OF THESE TERMS OF USE
Internet Innovation Alliance reserves the right to change the terms, conditions, and notices under which the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site is offered, including but not limited to the charges associated with the use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site.
LINKS TO THIRD PARTY SITES
The Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site may contain links to other Web Sites (“Linked Sites”). The Linked Sites are not under the control of Internet Innovation Alliance and Internet Innovation Alliance is not responsible for the contents of any Linked Site, including without limitation any link contained in a Linked Site, or any changes or updates to a Linked Site. Internet Innovation Alliance is not responsible for webcasting or any other form of transmission received from any Linked Site. Internet Innovation Alliance is providing these links to you only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by Internet Innovation Alliance of the site or any association with its operators.
NO UNLAWFUL OR PROHIBITED USE
As a condition of your use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site, you warrant to Internet Innovation Alliance that you will not use the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site for any purpose that is unlawful or prohibited by these terms, conditions, and notices. You may not use the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site in any manner which could damage, disable, overburden, or impair the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site or interfere with any other party’s use and enjoyment of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site. You may not obtain or attempt to obtain any materials or information through any means not intentionally made available or provided for through the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Sites.
USE OF COMMUNICATION SERVICES
The Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site may contain bulletin board services, chat areas, news groups, forums, communities, personal web pages, calendars, and/or other message or communication facilities designed to enable you to communicate with the public at large or with a group (collectively, “Communication Services”), you agree to use the Communication Services only to post, send and receive messages and material that are proper and related to the particular Communication Service. By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree that when using a Communication Service, you will not:
Defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others.
Publish, post, upload, distribute or disseminate any inappropriate, profane, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent or unlawful topic, name, material or information.
Upload files that contain software or other material protected by intellectual property laws (or by rights of privacy of publicity) unless you own or control the rights thereto or have received all necessary consents.
Upload files that contain viruses, corrupted files, or any other similar software or programs that may damage the operation of another’s computer.
Advertise or offer to sell or buy any goods or services for any business purpose, unless such Communication Service specifically allows such messages.
Conduct or forward surveys, contests, pyramid schemes or chain letters.
Download any file posted by another user of a Communication Service that you know, or reasonably should know, cannot be legally distributed in such manner.
Falsify or delete any author attributions, legal or other proper notices or proprietary designations or labels of the origin or source of software or other material contained in a file that is uploaded.
Restrict or inhibit any other user from using and enjoying the Communication Services.
Violate any code of conduct or other guidelines which may be applicable for any particular Communication Service.
Harvest or otherwise collect information about others, including e-mail addresses, without their consent.
Violate any applicable laws or regulations.
Internet Innovation Alliance has no obligation to monitor the Communication Services. However, Internet Innovation Alliance reserves the right to review materials posted to a Communication Service and to remove any materials in its sole discretion. Internet Innovation Alliance reserves the right to terminate your access to any or all of the Communication Services at any time without notice for any reason whatsoever.
Internet Innovation Alliance reserves the right at all times to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, or to edit, refuse to post or to remove any information or materials, in whole or in part, in Internet Innovation Alliance’s sole discretion.
Always use caution when giving out any personally identifying information about yourself or your children in any Communication Service. Internet Innovation Alliance does not control or endorse the content, messages or information found in any Communication Service and, therefore, Internet Innovation Alliance specifically disclaims any liability with regard to the Communication Services and any actions resulting from your participation in any Communication Service. Managers and hosts are not authorized Internet Innovation Alliance spokespersons, and their views do not necessarily reflect those of Internet Innovation Alliance.
Materials uploaded to a Communication Service may be subject to posted limitations on usage, reproduction and/or dissemination. You are responsible for adhering to such limitations if you download the materials.
MATERIALS PROVIDED TO Internet Innovation Alliance OR POSTED AT ANY Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE
Internet Innovation Alliance does not claim ownership of the materials you provide to Internet Innovation Alliance (including feedback and suggestions) or post, upload, input or submit to any Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site or its associated services (collectively “Submissions”). However, by posting, uploading, inputting, providing or submitting your Submission you are granting Internet Innovation Alliance, its affiliated companies and necessary sublicensees permission to use your Submission in connection with the operation of their Internet businesses including, without limitation, the rights to: copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, translate and reformat your Submission; and to publish your name in connection with your Submission.
No compensation will be paid with respect to the use of your Submission, as provided herein. Internet Innovation Alliance is under no obligation to post or use any Submission you may provide and may remove any Submission at any time in Internet Innovation Alliance’s sole discretion.
By posting, uploading, inputting, providing or submitting your Submission you warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to your Submission as described in this section including, without limitation, all the rights necessary for you to provide, post, upload, input or submit the Submissions.
LIABILITY DISCLAIMER
THE INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, AND SERVICES INCLUDED IN OR AVAILABLE THROUGH THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE MAY INCLUDE INACCURACIES OR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS. CHANGES ARE PERIODICALLY ADDED TO THE INFORMATION HEREIN. Internet Innovation Alliance AND/OR ITS SUPPLIERS MAY MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR CHANGES IN THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE AT ANY TIME. ADVICE RECEIVED VIA THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PERSONAL, MEDICAL, LEGAL OR FINANCIAL DECISIONS AND YOU SHOULD CONSULT AN APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL FOR SPECIFIC ADVICE TAILORED TO YOUR SITUATION.
Internet Innovation Alliance AND/OR ITS SUPPLIERS MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE SUITABILITY, RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, TIMELINESS, AND ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS CONTAINED ON THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE FOR ANY PURPOSE. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ALL SUCH INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND. Internet Innovation Alliance AND/OR ITS SUPPLIERS HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS WITH REGARD TO THIS INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT.
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL Internet Innovation Alliance AND/OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE, WITH THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE, WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF Internet Innovation Alliance OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES. BECAUSE SOME STATES/JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, THE ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ANY PORTION OF THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE, OR WITH ANY OF THESE TERMS OF USE, YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY IS TO DISCONTINUE USING THE Internet Innovation Alliance WEB SITE.
SERVICE CONTACT : .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
TERMINATION/ACCESS RESTRICTION
Internet Innovation Alliance reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate your access to the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site and the related services or any portion thereof at any time, without notice. GENERAL To the maximum extent permitted by law, this agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Washington, U.S.A. and you hereby consent to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of courts in King County, Washington, U.S.A. in all disputes arising out of or relating to the use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site. Use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site is unauthorized in any jurisdiction that does not give effect to all provisions of these terms and conditions, including without limitation this paragraph. You agree that no joint venture, partnership, employment, or agency relationship exists between you and Internet Innovation Alliance as a result of this agreement or use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site. Internet Innovation Alliance’s performance of this agreement is subject to existing laws and legal process, and nothing contained in this agreement is in derogation of Internet Innovation Alliance’s right to comply with governmental, court and law enforcement requests or requirements relating to your use of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site or information provided to or gathered by Internet Innovation Alliance with respect to such use. If any part of this agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable pursuant to applicable law including, but not limited to, the warranty disclaimers and liability limitations set forth above, then the invalid or unenforceable provision will be deemed superseded by a valid, enforceable provision that most closely matches the intent of the original provision and the remainder of the agreement shall continue in effect. Unless otherwise specified herein, this agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the user and Internet Innovation Alliance with respect to the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site and it supersedes all prior or contemporaneous communications and proposals, whether electronic, oral or written, between the user and Internet Innovation Alliance with respect to the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site. A printed version of this agreement and of any notice given in electronic form shall be admissible in judicial or administrative proceedings based upon or relating to this agreement to the same extent an d subject to the same conditions as other business documents and records originally generated and maintained in printed form. It is the express wish to the parties that this agreement and all related documents be drawn up in English.
COPYRIGHT AND TRADEMARK NOTICES:
All contents of the Internet Innovation Alliance Web Site are: and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved.
TRADEMARKS
The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.
The example companies, organizations, products, people and events depicted herein are fictitious. No association with any real company, organization, product, person, or event is intended or should be inferred.
Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved.
NOTICES AND PROCEDURE FOR MAKING CLAIMS OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Pursuant to Title 17, United States Code, Section 512(c)(2), notifications of claimed copyright infringement under United States copyright law should be sent to Service Provider’s Designated Agent. ALL INQUIRIES NOT RELEVANT TO THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURE WILL RECEIVE NO RESPONSE. See Notice and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement.