Recently I had the privilege of participating in Georgetown University’s look back at the National Broadband Plan and its impact. Although far less high-profile than many made-for-the-media-circus endeavors, the National Broadband Plan (NBBP) proved a model of creativity… efficient, effective government, your tax dollars well-spent. Much credit goes to NBBP’s fearless and far-sighted leader Blair Levin, and Blair happily enjoyed a victory lap while heaping praise upon his many able lieutenants and soldiers… both outcomes to be expected by those who know Blair well!
While others dove deep into the specific recommendations made and outcomes achieved in the report itself, I took away four core conclusions from the five-years-after look back:
1. People Matter. Being the government is not a barrier to efficiency, innovation or effectiveness… given the right team and right processes. Blair gathered a “best and brightest” of policy analysts to research and write NBBP. He neither relied on outside experts alone nor eschewed career professionals. Instead he blended a team of thoughtful go-getters such as Pew’s John Horrigan, with leading thinkers at several agencies, a “best and brightest” approach that paid dividends.
2. Process Matters. The NBBP planning efforts were highly inclusive, hearing from all sides of most issues and inviting every sector to participate. No ideological or political litmus tests applied, maximizing ideas and enthusiasm. Concurrently NBBP was highly transparent, minimizing suspicions or criticisms of the ultimate product (lessons from the failed-and-far-less-transparent 1993 “HillaryCare” and 2001 “Cheney Energy Policy”).
3. Policy Matters. Even the best process and smartest people would not have counted if they failed to ask the right questions and offer the right answers. In this case, they did both, highlighting the critical need for more spectrum for broadband services, for example, along with creative methods for finding it. NBBP likewise helped illuminate the need for and value of driving fiber deeper into networks, urging an “if you build it they will come” approach that has largely matched reality. And NBBP supplied vision of a broadband-enabled world for those many policy makers less familiar with the end-game opportunities.
4. Politics Matters. In this case, avoiding the unnecessary political morass named Net Neutrality. To have observed the President on the campaign trail, one might have concluded that the #1 broadband issue was Net Neutrality and preventing some nefarious monopolists from hijacking the “People’s Internet.” To its great credit, the NBBP recognized the difference between serious policy questions and partisan political hype in search of marketplace realities and assiduously avoided the issue. (Officially, these political appointees deferred to the FCC that wanted to take the issue head on… yet while the FCC spent a year stuck in the political mud, the NBBP charged forward). In reality the NBBP planners understood that the light-tough regulatory approach identified by President Clinton and maintained by President Bush paid extraordinary dividends, as we saw in a roaring broadband economy. Recent decisions to roll back those long-standing policies are a gamble at best, and an unnecessary one. Broadband and especially wireless has thrived in a light-touch regulatory framework, but we’ve just plucked a whole bunch of feathers from the golden goose. Maybe it won’t impact egg production, but maybe it will. Time will tell.
At the Washington Post, Larry Downes has penned a piece highlighting a recent Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy event commemorating the fifth anniversary of the National Broadband Plan. Headlined “Did the National Broadband Plan spur innovation?” the full piece is definitely worth checking out. An excerpt:
For the next five years, we need a significant policy reset to meet both the challenges and opportunities of the broadband revolution. Or rather, as I’ve argued before, a return to the bipartisan “light touch” policy embraced in the early years of the Internet revolution, in which regulators largely left broadband governance to the multi-stakeholder engineering-driven process that created the technology in the first place.
As the broadband revolution spreads its disruption farther from traditional computing, communications and consumer electronics industries, innovators need a kind of Hippocratic Oath from policymakers of all political persuasions. When considering regulatory intervention in quickly-evolving markets and technologies, our overriding public policy should be “first, do no harm.”
But given the alarming rise in heavy-handed interventions from state and local regulators, as well as a growing list of federal agencies including the FAA, FDA, FTC, SEC and the FCC itself, the prospects for a return to more rational policies — the kind that encouraged the broadband revolution to achieve the remarkable progress we have already witnessed — seem dim, at least for now.
The seeds for the National Broadband Plan were sown in the early days of the Obama administration. Perhaps the next president will call for a second plan that will build on the successes of the first. And learn from its misfires.
This week marks the five year anniversary of “Connecting America,” the FCC’s National Broadband Plan to improve Internet access in the United States. One of the many important goals set forth in the plan is commonly referred to as the “100 Squared Initiative”:
At least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable access to actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and actual upload speeds of at least 50 megabits per second.——- commonly referred to as the “100 Squared Initiative.”
That seemed like a doable — if lofty — goal back in 2010, but since Internet providers had already sextupled the number of people with >100 Mbps high-speed broadband by December 31, 2013 (the most recent numbers from the National Broadband Map), we thought it would be worth highlighting the progress.
That’s a pretty good leap in the three years that have been measured, but if the FCC is going to hit its goal by 2020, regulatory roadblocks to deployment and the billions in private investment needed to make it happen should be avoided.
For more on National Broadband Plan progress, check out the event being held by the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy today beginning at 9 am (EDT). Our own Bruce Mehlman will be participating in a discussion called “The Agenda Ahead” at 3:15 pm. Details on the event—“The National Broadband Plan: Looking Back, Reaching Forward”—can be found here.
Any architect will tell you that it’s impossible to build a house without a blueprint. This is true even more in telecom. Fortunately, the country just celebrated the fourth birthday of the National Broadband Plan, our blueprint for the future of broadband.
Often, government reports sit on shelves gathering dust. Thankfully, this one did not. Acting on a request from Congress, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) produced a report that was a vision for a connected future of universal broadband and a clarion call to move forward with innovation rather than letting America fall behind other countries.
The Plan started with a clear vision: every American deserves broadband. Not only that, every American needs broadband as it becomes increasingly critical for applying for jobs, learning new skills, communicating with others, and accessing our government. As the report said, “broadband can be our foundation for economic growth, job creation, global competitiveness and a better way of life.”
Over the last four years, there has been great progress. When the report was adopted, over 100 million Americans did not have broadband and 14 million Americans did not even have access to infrastructure that would enable broadband applications. Now, those numbers are significantly smaller, thanks to private sector investment and government’s continued focus. According to a White House report from last June, “about 91 percent of Americans have access to wired broadband speeds of at least 10Mbps downstream, and 81 percent of Americans have access to similarly fast mobile wireless broadband.”
In fact, that 2013 report notes that the definition of “broadband” has essentially shifted to speeds greater than 10 Mbps rather than the government’s historic definition of broadband beginning at 3 Mbps, which is good enough for one user at a time to load photos onto Facebook in a household, but not fast enough to download HD video from Netflix. Average delivered broadband speeds have doubled since 2009 to keep up with consumer needs.
This is only a beginning: President Obama’s recent State of the Union set a goal that 99% of students would have access to ultra-high speed broadband in schools and libraries over the next four years.
That kind of achievement only happens with massive levels of private sector investment, and the private sector has begun doing its part. Over the last four years, tens of billions of dollars of investment from the private sector have been directed towards expanding broadband access and increasing broadband speed. Investment in wireless broadband alone jumped over 40% between 2009 and 2012. In fact, two companies in this sector – AT&T and Verizon – were named “Investment Heroes” by the Progressive Policy Institute for their commitment to America’s telecommunications future. This is appropriate as the Plan stated that “broadband is the great infrastructure challenge of the early 21st century.”
To meet that challenge, government must encourage more private investment, while ensuring equitable access for every American to benefit from all that broadband has to offer. As the report stated, “the role of government is and should remain limited.”
As with many such efforts, this won’t happen without effort. The National Broadband Plan made clear that the nation would eventually have to make the transition from the aging telephone network to a system based on new broadband technologies. An FCC technology task force made the point even more clearly – that transition must happen over the course of this decade.
In fact, most consumers have already made this transition voluntarily. Less than one-third of residential consumers still use “plain old telephone service” at home (U-verse or Skype anyone?). The FCC has recently approved trials for these next-generation networks, which is a major step forward towards the all-broadband future foreshadowed in the Plan.
Four years after the National Broadband Plan, we have a vibrant, robust, cross-platform competitive system in which more and more Americans are gaining access to faster and faster broadband every day. There is more work to do, so let’s keep moving forward and not inhibit it through policies and regulations that would slow investment rather than increase it. If we want to be sure that every American has access to broadband, we should follow the vision set out in the National Broadband Plan for universal broadband, and move quickly toward the transition to modern high-speed broadband networks and services.
Earlier today, the House Communications Subcommittee held a hearing on what’s commonly known in the tech industry as the “IP transition.”
That may sound like a rather dry affair, but the issues being discussed are anything but dry or boring. In fact, when it comes to our nation’s communications infrastructure — and, really, the health of our vital tech economy — conversations like the one held today are critical.
While the hearing itself was short on fireworks, it was not without surprises. Both Public Knowledge’s VP Harold Feld and AT&T’s Senior VP Jim Cicconi agreed on much – for example, that well-constructed trials are needed and that as the transition moves forward, certain principles must continue to be adhered to. As Cicconi testified:
[T]his transition from the old to the new should consider things we’ve all come to see as fundamental — universal connectivity, consumer protection, reliability, public safety, and interconnection.
The fact that Feld and Cicconi agree not just on the importance of those “things we’ve all come to see as fundamental,” but on the importance of moving forward with the transition itself, shows just how much things have changed in a short amount of time.
The legacy copper telephone network that has served our country so well for over a century is rapidly being abandoned by consumers, who are increasingly choosing wireless and VoIP for their communication needs. At the same time, providers like AT&T and Verizon are required to continue investing billions maintaining the network of old.
This point was not lost on Rep. John Dingell, who stated during the hearing that the billions now spent on legacy networks “would be better spent on the IP backbone of the future.”
But the IP transition is about more than the direction of investment dollars. As Cicconi told the Subcommittee:
Four years ago the FCC issued a National Broadband Plan as directed by the Congress. That plan concluded that bringing modern broadband services to all Americans is vital, and that to do so we must have communications policies rooted in the future, not the past.
Put another way, if we’re ever going to achieve the goals of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan, the IP transition needs to be encouraged through smart policies. That starts with looking at regulations crafted in 1996 or earlier that no longer apply to — and may in fact hold back — the vast array of choices consumers now have.
Put still another way, the IP transition is really a national broadband goal. The only question, which today’s hearing started to address, is how best to get there.
For AT&T’s part, the company has already put forward a plan with the FCC to conduct “test trials” akin to the one conducted during the transition to digital broadcasting in order to identify any potential problems as the legacy network is upgraded and the few customers who still have legacy service move to modern connections. As Cicconi testified:
We feel trials are critical. As careful as our planning is, no one can anticipate every issue that may arise when we actually transition off the legacy wireline infrastructure. Trials will help us learn while we still have a safety-net in place. And as we learn, all of us — industry, government, customers and stakeholders — can then work together over the coming years to address any problems we find.
On this point too, Public Knowledge’s Feld agreed, although his organization’s vision for how the trials should be conducted differed from AT&T’s. And encouragingly, Rep. Dingell also stated the FCC should “work with AT&T to set IP trials in motion,” adding that the trials would be an “invaluable case study for businesses, government, and consumers.” Rep. Shimkus and Rep. Waxman agreed that we should move forward with the trials, as well.
As Cicconi noted during his testimony, the transition is already well underway, but it won’t be a quick process. Nor should it be, because every time we make a great leap forward, we should know exactly where we’re going to land. Now is the time for all parties to work together on ensuring the transition goes as smoothly as possible. That’s what today’s hearing was about.
Any time you have industry, government, and consumer groups in agreement on something, you know it’s time to act. Today’s hearing was just one of many discussions yet to come on the IP transition, but it was a critical step in the right direction.
At the Daily Yonder, Nicole Palya Wood of the National Grange (which is one of our members) writes about the promise of 4G networks in rural areas, and how government must ensure the private investment necessary to connect every corner of America to mobile broadband continues to be encouraged:
This year alone, wireless companies will invest about $26 billion in these networks – far more than the government can or should spend at a time when private companies are vigorously competing for customers in all but the handful of communities targeted by the FCC’s auction program.
Let’s hope Washington can keep its end of the bargain – by making sure that the new fund works as promised and by implementing smart policies that support private investment. The universal service fund alone can’t reach every high-cost rural area across the country.
Less regulation, more government spectrum available for consumer use, and fewer limitations on which companies can acquire and deploy more robust networks across additional bandwidth will lead to the President’s goal of 98 percent LTE deployment in the United States.
The first commercial traffic crossed the Internet in 1992. Since then, technology has dramatically changed the way consumers communicate. Last year, U.S. consumers sent 2.3 trillion text messages and logged 2.29 trillion minutes on their wireless devices. As consumer demand for wireless continues to grow, the supply of government allocated airwaves is not keeping up.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) projects that by 2014, mobile data traffic will be 35 times 2009 levels, equaling demand for 1,097 MHz of wireless broadband spectrum. The Commission therefore estimates that the deficit in wireless broadband spectrum will be 275 MHz by 2014.
“With consumer demand on track to soon outpace supply, the government must move quickly to allocate more airwaves for consumer use in order to keep mobile broadband available, accessible and affordable. And beyond making additional spectrum available, it’s crucial that policy makers encourage the private investment necessary to deploy these airwaves for the benefit of all Americans.”
— IIA Co-Chair Jamal Simmons
From 1996 to 2011, the broadband industry invested nearly $1.2 trillion, and more private sector dollars are critical to reaching the President’s goal of universal broadband. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act earmarked $7.2 billion for the expansion of broadband, and the FCC’s recently launched Connect America Fund allocates $300 million more – but a FCC task force said reaching 100 million homes with a 100Mbps nationwide broadband network could cost as much as $350 billion. Taxpayer funds alone will not suffice.
“Pro-Internet policy successes came when government removed barriers, rather than adding new ones. Unfortunately those days may be ending. While there is rare bipartisan agreement that the biggest challenge to broadband-enabled growth is lack of private investment and available spectrum, there is growing disagreement on how to fix it.”
— IIA Co-Chair Bruce Mehlman
Today, at an Internet Academy on Capitol Hill hosted by the IIA, industry experts will discuss, “20 Years Later: Are We Winning or Losing the Spectrum War?” Speakers Bret Swanson, president of Entropy Economics, and Morgan Reed, executive director of the Association for Competitive Technology, will join IIA Co-Chairmen Bruce Mehlman and Jamal Simmons to examine spectrum policy, bandwidth consumption versus availability, and the need for investment as wireless technologies continue to advance. Topics will include:
• A look at how technology has changed since the first commercial traffic crossed the Internet in 1992.
• The benefits of mobile technology, and how it has changed the day-to-day activities and operations of a typical Hill office.
• The increase in bandwidth usage over the past two decades and the need for continued network investment.
Speaking of good steps, yesterday the FCC announced another major investment in bringing broadband to everyone. As Andrew Feinberg of The Hillreports:
The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday announced a $300 million effort to extend high-speed Internet to up to 400,000 previously unserved homes, businesses and anchor institutions in rural America.
The Connect America Fund was created last October when the commission voted unanimously for what Chairman Julius Genachowski called a “once-in-a-generation reform” of the Universal Service Fund to help connect all Americans with high speed Internet by the close of the decade. The USF was established to guarantee telephone service to all regardless of means.
In anticipation of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights hearing on the proposed spectrum deal between Verizon and cable companies, Comcast’s Executive Vice President David Cohen has previewed his testimony on the company’s public policy blog:
The spectrum license transfers are consistent with the Communications Act, FCC rules, and the antitrust laws. They also will further the spectrum policy goals of Congress, the Administration, and the National Broadband Plan. Neither the License Assignment nor the Commercial Agreements reduce or harm competition in any product or geographic market. In fact, the agreements will offer further competition and innovation in the marketplace.
The Internet Innovation Alliance has publicly supported the proposed merger of AT&T (one of our members) and T-Mobile due to the real potential the merger will have for accelerated deployment of broadband services and delivery of high-speed connectivity to parts of our country that are currently underserved or have no broadband service whatsoever.
We believe the wider delivery of 4G LTE AT&T projects will be enabled by the merger will generate billions in new private investment and created tens of thousands of jobs when America needs them the most, along with a range of new opportunities in rural communities and enhanced education, health care and small business.
Thus we are disappointed by the reported opposition of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and the Commission staff to the proposed transaction. Moreover, we were surprised and disappointed by the agency’s decision to release publicly documents and the Staff Report on the application after AT&T has withdrawn the transaction from the FCC, an action described today as “unprecedented” by nominee Jessica Rosenworsal.
It was reported the Staff Report was released without even providing an opportunity for the parties the basic opportunity to see or address it first. It is extremely troubling that such procedural short cuts and attendant media attention may prejudice their efforts to reach an accommodation regarding the transaction with the Justice Department.
The FCC will clearly need to address any transactions proposed in the future, on their own merits, irrespective of the Staff Report about the withdrawn transaction. So we fail to see how the FCC’s public release of the Staff Report serves any constructuve purpose or enhances public confidence in the Commission’s future considerations.
The FCC plays an essential role in advancing the goals of the National Broadband Plan, which it adopted and which is supported by the Administration, many in Congress, and the IIA. That role requires identification and advancement of critical policies, such as USF and spectrum reforms. It also requires the integrity of the FCC’s process to ensure all supplicants, large and small, receive a fair and even opportunity to make their case and to amend their petitions, unprejudiced by leaks to the media or prior analyses which may bias the consideration of prior or future applications.
The New York Times’ Brian Stelter reports on a new initiative from the FCC to help bring broadband access to the estimated 100 million Americans who are still without:
On Wednesday, the F.C.C. will announce commitments from most of the big cable companies in the United States to supply access for $9.99 a month to a subset of low-income households. The low introductory price is meant to appeal to new customers who have not had broadband in the past.
The F.C.C. is billing the initiative as the biggest effort ever to help close the digital divide. Because no federal funds are being invested, the initiative relies in large part on the cooperation of private companies.
In coordination with the low-cost connections, tech companies are pitching in refurbished computers for low-income households, along with educational initiatives to show people the value of being connected. Good stuff all around.
With the Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission separately looking over the planned merger of AT&T and T-Mobile, The Hill‘s Gautham Nagesh checked in with AT&T’s Jim Cicconi:
“We’re not really running into major concerns or disquiet about the deal on any scale that we feel would threaten approval,” said AT&T senior executive vice president Jim Cicconi, pointing out the deal has now been endorsed by 27 state governors, more than 100 mayors and over 150 Chambers of Commerce nationwide. “We’ve got good momentum on this and it’s growing.”
Cicconi also made clear that one of the merger’s key selling points — near achievement of President Obama’s goal of reaching 98 percent of Americans with broadband by deploying next-generation LTE coverage to the vast majority (97%) of Americans — hinges on merger approval:
“With this transaction we can and will (build out to 97 percent of the population),” Cicconi said. “It costs a lot to do that, $8 billion, but it’s money we’re willing to invest if this merger is approved. We’re not going to do that otherwise. Period. It’s very simple, it’s binary. If approved we can and will do it, if not we cannot and won’t.”
Yesterday, United States Cattlemen’s Association Executive Vice President Jess Peterson attended a White House Rural Economic Forum at the Northwest Iowa Community College in Peosta, Iowa. Here’s his thoughts on the event. — IIA
It was exciting to hear President Obama’s remarks before we headed into our breakout sessions to discuss the importance of increased access to broadband Internet across the country. The President rightly pointed out that rural communities’ ability to benefit from innovation and efficiency is being stifled by the lack of access to high-speed broadband. I think it’s critical for private investment and public partnership to advance these goals to achieve increased access in the areas of our country where it matters most.
Access to reliable and fast mobile broadband is more than just a policy initiative. Here in rural America, we desperately need it — to enable America’s farmers and ranchers to keep up with market conditions, and to quickly and easily communicate with suppliers, customers and food processors. It’s a critical tool for those of us who help feed and clothe Americans and others around the world.
Next-generation mobile broadband in rural America will also come with a number of other benefits, like better healthcare for those who live far from the nearest hospital, online educational opportunities for students, and access to the global marketplace for all kinds of small businesses.
During my breakout session with White House officials, Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar covered several of his department’s issue areas that will help enhance rural America, including natural resource management and conservation, and the preservation of public lands. Secretary Salazar echoed the President’s sentiment about the need to increase broadband access in underserved and rural communities, and he stressed the fact that this is an important piece to achieving overall Department of Interior goals. Fortunately, I had an opportunity to personally thank Secretary Salazar for his leadership on these issues, and promise him a continued partnership towards advancing these goals!
Northeast Iowa Community College is a great example of a success story as a result of the deployment of high-speed broadband Internet. Already, NICC has utilized this access to implement distance learning classes and programs so that students in rural America can achieve the same quality of education as those in urban areas. We need a lot more of these stories.
All in all, the White House Rural Economic Forum was a great event, demonstrating our nation’s leaders’ commitment to literally bringing rural America up-to-speed with the rest of the digitally connected nation. I look forward to learning more about what lies ahead for rural America.
— Jess Peterson
For more from Jess Peterson, check out this video he recorded for IIA.
Our Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher has penned an op-ed for the Richmond Times-Dispatch on the power of mobile broadband to connect rural communities to the world. Here’s a taste:
For rural America, broadband is the bridge to our nation’s economic mainstream, but of today’s 20 percent of the national population that lacks broadband access, the vast majority live in rural areas. Bringing high-speed Internet access to rural-broadband have-nots is today’s greatest telecommunications policy challenge.
Now a single means of meeting that challenge is at hand. AT&T has pledged that its merger with T-Mobile will result in broadband reaching more than 97 percent of the population within six years, connecting 55 million Americans who lack the service today. President Obama has set a national goal of universal broadband deployment, defined as reaching 98 percent of our population, within five years. Now one company alone, with approval of the pending merger, will almost enable that goal to be met, leaving a far smaller gap to be filled with government grants and loans and other private investment.
Check out the full op-ed at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
76 House Democrats wrote to the Federal Communications Commission and Justice Department on Friday urging them to consider AT&T’s commitment to deploying next-generation wireless coverage nationwide when reviewing the firm’s proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA.
The lawmakers, lead by Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) cite AT&T’s plan to deploy 4G wireless broadband networks to more than 97 percent of the country and argue the commitment will “create thousands of jobs, including many good paying union jobs with solid benefits, which will greatly contribute to our continuing economic recovery.”
Reforming the Universal Service Fund (USF) for the broadband era, using spectrum more efficiently and the joining of AT&T and T-mobile offer the best hope for meaningfully advancing broadband deployment and availability in 2011.
“The nation’s foremost telecommunications challenge is the need for universal broadband. Broadband is the bridge that ties rural communities to the American economic mainstream. The widespread deployment of high-speed Internet services promotes a national connectivity that benefits both rural and metropolitan interests.”
For decades, the primary purpose of USF has been to fund voice services through the equivalent of a tax on inter-state phone services. We at IIA strongly support the Federal Communication Commission’s unanimous decision in February to adopt a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) that focuses on reforming the Universal Service Fund to include broadband. Modernization of the USF to bring high-speed Internet services to unserved and underserved areas is a major step toward achieving universal broadband.
“Given the explosion of broadband-enabled traffic, our nation urgently needs more spectrum to continue fueling our high tech engine. We can’t make spectrum, so we have to make sure it is efficiently used and identify policies that encourage innovation so more can be done with the spectrum that is available.”
In line with our longstanding focus on the exaflood — the exponential explosion of digital content on the Internet through additional users and new bandwidth-hungry applications — we foresee ever-growing opportunities for our economy and our nation, as long as we have the Internet infrastructure in place to support it. Wireless technology faces challenges and constraints similar to land-based broadband with a limited amount of spectrum available to support the burgeoning population of mobile users.
“Expanding the availability and reliability of wireless broadband are the most important benefits of uniting AT&T and T-Mobile. When it comes to telecommunications policy, the true underdogs are underserved Americans in rural areas and communities of color throughout the country who need better access to high-speed broadband Internet. Bringing the assets and resources of these two companies together should give them that access.”
After reviewing the business plans for the proposed joining of AT&T and T-Mobile, submissions made to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), analyses by experts in technology and finance and assessments by community leaders, we believe that uniting the strengths of AT&T and T-Mobile will move our nation significantly closer to achieving universal broadband, advancing our society across the board. The combined resources of the two companies will bring 4G LTE, with wireless speeds approximating the fastest wired connections to more than 97 percent of Americans, advancing education, health care, our economy and high-tech innovation, and particularly, opportunities in rural areas and communities of color.
Over at Channel Partners, Josh Long chatted with our Honorary Chairman Rick Boucher on the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile, the expansion of mobile broadband, and how the deal will “nearly achieve President Obama’s goal of bringing broadband to 98 percent of Americans.” Check it out.
Earlier this week, we announced former Congressman Rick Boucher (D-Va.) had joined IIA as honorary co-chairman. As former leader of the House telecom subcommittee, Rep. Boucher is widely regarded as an expert on telecom policy.
The Hill’s Sara Jerome sat down with Rep. Boucher to talk about joining IIA and why he is an advocate for the joining of AT&T and T-Mobile. From the article:
“The primary issue is access to broadband. I think the secondary issue is the effect on competition,” he said. “The effect on competition is minimal enough that we should not sacrifice the chance to bring broadband to virtually everyone who wants it.”
Boucher would not predict whether the deal would decrease competition “since new carriers are cropping up all the time.” He noted that most major cities have five or more wireless carriers.
A former rural lawmaker, Boucher emphasized the benefits for the countryside if AT&T were to expand broadband to hard-to-reach areas, as its pledge says it will.
“Broadband is the bridge that links our rural communities to the economic mainstream,” Boucher said.
At yesterday’s Senate hearing on the proposed combination of AT&T and T-Mobile, AT&T chief executive Randall Stephenson told Antitrust subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl he would accept a condition of not using Universal Service Fund (USF) money to help fund the company’s mobile broadband buildout.
Given AT&T has combining with T-Mobile will allow it to deploy LTE mobile broadband technology to reach over 97% of the U.S. population Stephenson’s statement is certainly significant in that AT&T would go a long way toward achieving President Obama’s goal of connecting every American to the “digital economy,” only with private funding.
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.