Via John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable, acting FCC Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn reiterated the Commission’s focus on mobile broadband while maintaining a “light” regulatory touch:
In her first speech as acting FCC chairwoman, Mignon Clyburn told a CTIA convention audience in Las Vegas Tuesday (May 21), that “maximizing the benefits of mobile communications will continue to be a top priority for the FCC” and that “mobile innovation is key to U.S. competitiveness.”
She said the FCC is on track to issue incentive auction rules by the end of the year.
In a speech before the Media Institute yesterday, Craig Silliman, Senior Voce President of Public Policy for Verizon, argued that outdated regulations risk holding back innovation and investment. It’s a similar argument other telecom providers have made recently. As Silliman told the crowd:
[W]e need to ensure is that we do not let an increasingly outdated regulatory regime for the Internet ecosystem slow innovation and investment. The 1996 Telecom Act succeeded in what it was designed to achieve, but almost two decades later it is leaving the FCC struggling to shoehorn Internet-era technologies into phone-era regulations. I am not suggesting that the answer is to abolish all regulation. But I am suggesting that we need a 21st century policy framework that is designed for 21st century technologies and marketplaces, not 19th century ones.
We need to start by asking the right questions. It has been suggested that a key question for the next FCC chairman will be how to keep the FCC relevant in the Internet era. I believe that is the wrong question. I recognize, of course, that tactical battles to secure budgets and resources are part of any organization or entity, including the federal government. But a strategic view of policymaking starts by asking what objective we are trying to achieve, and then asking whether regulation is needed, why it is needed, and who is best placed to administer it.
Late last week, the FCC’s Technology Transitions Policy Task Force announced it was issuing Public Notice seeking comment on proposed “beta” trials to transition America’s networks to all-IP. Below are reactions to the announcement from IIA leadership.
From Honorary Chairman and former Congressman Rick Boucher:
”The FCC’s recognition of the importance of the move from TDM to all-IP networks is a welcome building block, but it’s disappointing that comprehensive IP transition trials have not been authorized. Only through a comprehensive examination can potential issues be identified and addressed and consumers be protected.”
From Co-Chairman Bruce Mehlman:
“The Commission is steering in the right direction, but traveling at the wrong speed. Fully committing to all-IP networks would bring the greatest benefits to consumers and best-equip America to compete on a global scale. Baby steps won’t keep pace with technology.”
From Co-Chairman Jamal Simmons:
“The three areas on which the FCC seeks comment are all important pieces of the puzzle, but instead of a piecemeal approach to figuring out challenges with the IP Transition, the Commission should quickly adopt a holistic strategy, including well-defined trials in designated wire centers, to bring broadband-enabled benefits in health care, education and entrepreneurship to all Americans.”
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.
In an op-ed for the Huffington Post, American Consumer Institute for Citizen Research President Steve Pociask worries the FCC may end up hurting consumers with its upcoming spectrum incentive auctions:
A basic principle of any well-designed auction process is that it is open and competitive. However, there are some unsettling news reports that this basic principle may be in jeopardy. For one, there has been some recent coaxing by the Department of Justice that the FCC may want to consider favoring its auction to benefit some small wireless providers over larger ones. Along the same lines, there have been suggestions that the FCC may consider rules to prevent the largest two wireless providers, AT&T and Verizon, from participating in the upcoming auctions. If recent headlines and comments from the FCC Chairman are any indication, Sprint and T-Mobile are “getting stronger” and the reality remains: “Every mobile operator out there, including the largest ones, needs more spectrum.”
Here is the problem—protecting competitors does not help competition, and that hurts consumers. Any action by the FCC that would intentionally benefit some competitors at the expense of others runs counter to the intent of Congress to constrain the FCC’s ability to limit participation in the upcoming spectrum auctions. When it comes to picking favorites in the market, that choice should stay with consumers, not regulators.
Back in February, our own Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher had similar thoughts on the FCC’s auctions:
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.”
Below is our statement on President Obama nominating Tom Wheeler to replace Julius Genachowski as head of the FCC:
IIA Congratulates Wheeler on Nomination to Be Next FCC Chairman
Recommends modernization, innovation and humility as goals for regulators
WASHINGTON, D.C. – May 1, 2013 – The Internet Innovation Alliance (IIA) today issued the following statement in response to President Obama’s nomination of Tom Wheeler to be the next Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC):
“Tom Wheeler is well-equipped to lead the Federal Communications Commission during a time that is crucial to the continued expansion and advancement of Internet technology. We congratulate him on his selection to serve as the next chairman of the Commission.
“In this new role, we hope he focuses on enabling the infrastructure investments required to put high-speed broadband access in the hands of more Americans. This resource is critical for education, health and entrepreneurship, and government and business must work together to increase its availability.
“As the leadership transition at the FCC takes shape, we look forward to our continued work with FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn who has been named interim Chair of the Commission. Her strong vision and focus on driving programs that will help bring high-speed broadband to more Americans is critical to the Administration’s technology policy goals.”
“As no one can predict the outcome of technological investments made today, modernization, innovation and humility should be the focus of regulators.”
In a piece for Politic365, Hispanic Leadership Fund President Mario H. Lopez (HLF is an IIA Member) writes about how the Hispanic community is leading the charge in adopting mobile broadband:
The modern Hispanic community is not only going mobile, but it’s outpacing the general population in doing so. Survey data tells an incredible story of how far our community has come in a short time in adopting new technologies. ComScore tells us that in two years (2010-2012), Hispanic adoption of smartphones increased from 43 percent to 57 percent whereas adoption of smartphones among the general population increased from 36 percent to 46 percent. And as recent data from Pew shows, 76 percent of Hispanics are more likely to use their mobile devices to go online.
Mobile Internet connectivity gives Hispanics access to the civic, health, social, and entertainment content that they crave. At a time when economic growth and employment remains sluggish, mobile Internet access allows Hispanics to search for work and take advantage of online training and education. Mobile Internet also keeps Hispanic entrepreneurs and innovators connected to their customers.
Keeping this positive trend going, Lopez argues, will take smart regulatory policy:
Opportunities available to Hispanics are on the rise, and our community is leveraging the economic and social benefits of mobile broadband to make the most of them. Policymakers in Washington must recognize this growing trend and do everything in the power to support it. In recent years the FCC has made some progress on the spectrum front.
It will be important for successors to outgoing FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and Commissioner Robert McDowell to speed up that progress and act upon the need to free up more spectrum for commercial use. The use of broadband connectivity will continue to be a crucial factor in creating jobs and economic growth, spurring innovation, and generating educational opportunities for all Americans.
Our Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher has an op-ed in The Hill on the need to modernize regs to keep up with today’s technology. Here’s a taste:
the development of the Internet has brought us to another critical juncture in communications policy as we consider how to complete the transition from the bygone era of plain old telephone service to the digital bonanza of the 21st century. It’s a critical transition, given the Internet’s increasingly dominant role in every part of our economy, as well as its ability to improve lives and help achieve important national goals. It’s also something that just about every stakeholder, including the Federal Communications Commission, regards as inevitable. As we move forward, the guiding principle must be to put consumers first.
In a must-read opinion piece for the National Journal, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai makes the case that America should be making a big push to transition to all IP-based networks:
America is in the midst of a technological revolution, what some call the IP Transition (“IP” stands for the Internet Protocol, which is the technical foundation for all these changes). IP-based networks are different from the copper-based networks of yesteryear in a fundamental way: They were not designed for voice service alone. Instead, IP-based technologies break down every kind of communication (voice, video, e-mail and more) into digital bits and transport those bits more efficiently and cheaply than ever before.
Despite these vast changes in the communications marketplace, the Federal Communications Commission hasn’t caught up. We still view the world as if consumers were at Ma Bell’s mercy, relying on copper lines to get basic voice service. As a result, we have a lot of obsolete rules on our books. (Just two months ago, the FCC finally repealed a rule first adopted by its Telegraph Division during the Great Depression!) These old rules aren’t just harmlessly yellowing with age. They are affirmatively discouraging companies from investing in next-generation networks.
Via Brendan Sasso of The Hill, suggestions for a new FCC Chairman are making their way to the White House:
A coalition of conservative groups is urging President Obama to pick a new Federal Communications Commission chairman who will take a light touch with new regulations.
“We need regulators who can resist the frequent urge to ‘do something’ about problems that are rapidly mooted by technological change anyway. Often, government’s best response is to do nothing,” the conservative groups wrote on Tuesday in the letter to Obama and Senate leaders.
President Obama not only has to name a replacement for Chairman Julius Genachowski, but one for Republican Commission Robert McDowell as well.
At The Hill, Brendan Sasso writes about outgoing FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s next gig:
The Aspen Institute announced on Monday that Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski will become a senior fellow at the non-partisan think tank after he steps down from his post.
Genachowski will be the fifth FCC chairman in a row to join the Washington, D.C.-based policy organization after leaving the commission. He will work on the Aspen Institute’s communications policy program.
At the Washington Post, Cecilia Kang sat down with Phil Weiser, President Obama’s former senior advisor on technology and innovation. The topic: Challenges facing the FCC moving forward. The entire interview is worth checking out, but here’s an exchange on the IP Transition:
What is the role of the FCC in the phone-to-broadband transition?
All current policy is built on the use of legacy technology and thus the transition away from it is major challenge for the FCC. Rather than necessarily attempt to simply transfer all legacy policy into the IP work, the FCC will need to ask ‘What policy regimes and policy goals are important?’ Consider, for example, the issue of access to video programming by the hearing impaired: what approach closed captioning should apply to Internet-delivered TV programs? Similarly, there are questions about how to provide next generation 911 access in an IP world. Another big issue will be whether and how to oversee interconnection arrangements. In short, there are big opportunities and challenges because we don’t have to do things in the way we have done them so far.
Tossing the TV is more evidence in favor of phone companies transitioning to all-IP.
As Ryan Nakashima from the Associated Press recently reported, there’s a dramatic shift afoot in how people are consuming entertainment:
Some people have had it with TV. They’ve had enough of the 100-plus-channel universe. They don’t like timing their lives around network show schedules. They’re tired of $100-plus monthly bills.
A growing number of them have stopped paying for cable and satellite TV service and don’t even use an antenna to get free signals over the air. These people are watching shows and movies on the Internet, sometimes via cellphone connections.
According to Nakashima, these TV tossers have been given a name by the Nielsen group—“Zero TV” households—and their numbers are increasing. In 2007, there were just 2 million homes. Today? 5 million and counting.
While those numbers aren’t yet big enough for broadcasters and cable providers to hit the panic button, they show an undeniable trend. Things are changing fast, and consumers increasingly want more freedom in when and where they watch their favorite shows. The season premiere of Game of Thrones set a record for piracy, which tells you two things: HBO’s business model probably needs an overhaul, and more and more people are unwilling to wait to be entertained.
It’s easy to label millions of people illegally downloading a hit show as entitled, but they’re just the scouts in what will eventually be an all-out assault from consumers on traditional business models. And once the armada lands, we’ll need networks powerful enough to meet their demands.
Those networks will be all IP, or all Internet Protocol.
The transition to all IP networks will mean everything is done via the Internet — not just web surfing and streaming video, but home phone service as well. IP networks will also make viewing TV over the net more reliable and consistent, since it will give companies the ability to invest in upgrades without maintaining legacy networks people are increasingly abandoning.
This transition won’t happen overnight, nor should it. Millions of Americans still rely on traditional landlines, just as millions still happily pay for cable and watch broadcast TV over the air. Ensuring people can still depend on their home phones and watch their favorite shows is critical. The transition beta trials AT&T has proposed and the formation of the FCC’s Technology Transitions Policy Task Force to oversee regulatory concerns are good ways to step forward carefully.
The tide is definitely sweeping up toward an all IP future. The recent bump in TV viewers going online is just latest evidence. One day, we might all live in “Zero TV” households, and if everything goes smoothly — if government and industry work together — we won’t even notice how radically things have changed. The home phone will still be the home phone and TV will still be TV; the only difference will be how they’re delivered.
A recent agreement between Verizon and AT&T over spectrum holdings has inspired complaints from the usual suspects.
In the agreement, AT&T will pay close to $2 billion to acquire 39 of Verizon’s lower 700 MHz B-block licenses. While that sounds complicated, all it really means is two innovators in a highly competitive industry have found a neat way to solve mutual problems… You know, the free market in action. And as with any free market solution to a problem—especially in the wireless industry—there are other competitors and interest groups aiming to block the deal from going forward.
It’s no secret the wireless industry is scrambling to keep up with consumer demand. To the delight of chiropractors everywhere, we are now a nation of slouchers, spending our days hunched over tiny screens. All this activity on our devices creates data, and all that data needs spectrum to travel from point A to point B. As a result, the airwaves are getting more and more crowded—a problem outgoing FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski accurately labeled the “spectrum crunch.”
The Commission’s upcoming spectrum incentive auctions will hopefully go a long way toward easing this crunch. But let’s face it, government is about as nimble as an iceberg, which means wireless providers need more than years-away government action to meet the needs of their customers. Since it’s impossible for the regulatory grind to keep up with consumer habits, it will take free market solutions to keep wireless customers satisfied.
Few technologies have been as quickly adopted as mobile broadband, and as a result, the wireless industry is a victim of its own success. With government assistance in freeing up airwaves a minefield of red tape, blocking deals between providers for spectrum drags the entire industry down. Companies like Verizon and AT&T are motivated by the need to please their customers. The question is, what motivates those trying to block them from doing so?
As soon as FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced his departure from the Commission, interest groups immediately began promoting their ideal candidates. As Brendan Sasso of The Hillreports, the latest person to offer a recommendation is someone very familiar with the FCC:
Public interest advocates are urging President Obama to choose a chairman of the Federal Communications Commission who will fight for liberal causes such as increased competition, media diversity and net-neutrality regulations. Michael Copps, a former FCC commissioner and acting chairman, along with dozens of public advocacy groups, laid out their priorities in a letter to President Obama on Thursday.
Public Knowledge, Consumers Union, Free Press, the New America Foundation, disability advocacy groups and Common Cause, where Copps now works, all signed on to the letter.
Among the list of potential nominees are venture capitalist Tom Wheeler, National Telecommunications and Information Administration head Larry Strickling, and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ambassador Karen Kornbluh.
Our own Bruce Mehlman has an opinion piece in The Street today examining the current state of telecom policy and how outdated regulations are holding a vibrant industry back. Here’s a taste:
As with government, the ability of businesses to invest is not unlimited. When demanding investment in redundant copper networks to preserve the status quo for an ever-shrinking minority of consumers, policy makers directly rob investment from faster broadband networks that serve the ever-growing majority of consumers. That’s the wrong choice.
Today’s broadband marketplace is hyper-competitive, rapidly innovating and most enabled by less regulation and a lighter regulatory approach to advance the public interest and best serve consumers. It’s clear that outmoded telecommunications regulations designed in the pre-broadband, pre-smart phone era no longer advance America’s future.
As with the adoption of any new technology, the move to IP networks offers challenges and opportunities. A majority of Americans have already changed from voice-only telephone networks. Roughly 93 percent of U.S. households subscribed to switched-access phone service a decade ago, according to USTelecom, today it’s less than one-third and is projected to decline to one-quarter of households by the end of 2013.
Moving the dwindling number of consumers still on copper technology will likely require a public-private partnership that can ensure no one is left behind while also providing access to affordable 21st century technologies.
Over at The Hill, Brendan Sasso warns President Obama is headed into a “political minefield” as he mulls a successor to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski:
It’s an important choice for Obama, as the next chairman will face difficult decisions over how to provide enough airwaves for mobile devices, preserve the openness of the Internet and promote competition.
Tom Wheeler, a venture capitalist and fundraiser for Obama, was considered the clear favorite for the job just last week. But then a coalition of public interest groups sent a letter to the president bashing him, and 37 senators signed a letter supporting an alternative pick: FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel.
“Wheeler is still the front runner, but it isn’t as secure as it was a week or two ago,” another industry watcher said.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.