Clearwire 2008 Annual Report Download - page 36

I
n June 200
6
, the Federal Aviation Administration, which we refer to as the FAA, proposed regulations
g
overnin
g
potential interference to navi
g
able airspace from certain FCC-licensed radio transmittin
g
devices
,
i
ncluding 2.
5
GHz transmitters. These regulations would require FAA notice and approval for new or modifie
d
t
ransm
i
tt
i
ng
f
ac
ili
t
i
es. I
f
a
d
opte
d
,t
h
ese regu
l
at
i
ons cou
ld
su
b
stant
i
a
ll
y
i
ncrease t
h
ea
d
m
i
n
i
strat
i
ve
b
ur
d
en an
d
costs
i
nvolved in deplo
y
in
g
our service.
I
n certain international markets, our subsidiaries are sub
j
ect to rules that provide that if the subsidiar
y
’s
wi
re
l
ess serv
i
ce
i
s
di
scont
i
nue
d
or
i
mpa
i
re
df
or a spec
ifi
e
d
per
i
o
d
o
f
t
i
me, t
h
e spectrum r
i
g
h
ts may
b
erevo
k
e
d
.
Cl
earwire/S
p
rint Transaction Regu
l
ation
Th
e FCC’s or
d
er approv
i
n
g
t
h
e Transact
i
ons was re
l
ease
d
on Nov. 7, 2008. A “Pet
i
t
i
on
f
or Recons
id
erat
i
on” o
f
t
he order was filed by the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition, which we refer to as PISC, on December 8, 2008 and
i
s currently pending at the FCC. In its petition, PISC expressed its support for the FCC’s decision to approve th
e
Transact
i
ons
b
ut as
k
e
d
t
h
e FCC on recons
id
erat
i
on to 1) remove BRS spectrum
f
rom t
h
e screen t
h
e FCC use
d
t
o
anal
y
ze the competitive effect of the proposed transaction; and 2) impose a condition on us to ensure that we follo
w
t
hrough on our commitment to build and operate an open network consistent with the FCC’s 200
5
Internet Polic
y
S
tatement
b
ysu
bj
ect
i
ng C
l
earw
i
re’s t
hi
r
d
-party contractua
l
arrangements to rev
i
ew. We oppose
d
PISC’s pet
i
t
i
o
n
b
ut also noted that the PISC petition’s narrow scope eliminated an
y
need for the FCC to sub
j
ect its decision t
o
a
pp
rove the Transactions to further review
.
I
n connect
i
on w
i
t
h
t
h
e FCC’s approva
l
o
f
t
h
e Transact
i
ons, we comm
i
tte
d
to meet t
h
e
S
print Nexte
l
Mer
g
e
r
O
r
d
er conditions that re
q
uire S
p
rint to offer service in the 2.5 GHz band to a
p
o
p
ulation of no less than 15 million
A
mericans by August 7, 2009. This deployment will include areas within a minimum of nine of the nation’s most
p
o
p
ulous 100 BTAs and at least one BTA less
p
o
p
ulous than the nation’s 200th most
p
o
p
ulous BTA. In these ten
BTAs, t
h
e
d
ep
l
o
y
ment w
ill
cover at
l
east one-t
hi
r
d
o
f
eac
h
BTA’s popu
l
at
i
on. T
h
e part
i
es
f
urt
h
er comm
i
tte
d
to o
ff
e
r
s
ervice in the 2.
5
GHz band to at least 1
5
million more Americans in areas within a minimum of nine additional
BTAs in the 100 most
p
o
p
ulous BTAs, and at least one additional BTA less
p
o
p
ulous than the nation’s 200th most
p
opu
l
ous BTA,
b
y August 7, 2011. In t
h
ese a
ddi
t
i
ona
l
ten BTAs t
h
e
d
ep
l
oyment w
ill
cover at
l
east one-t
hi
r
d
o
f
eac
h
BTA’s population. We expect to satisf
y
each of these conditions with our existin
g
markets and our planned ne
w
m
arkets
.
I
nternet T
a
x
a
tion
Th
e Internet Tax Free
d
om Act, w
hi
c
h
was s
i
gne
di
nto
l
aw
i
n Octo
b
er 2007, renewe
d
an
d
exten
d
e
d
unt
il
N
ovem
b
er 2014 a morator
i
um on taxes on Internet access an
d
mu
l
t
i
p
l
e,
di
scr
i
m
i
nator
y
taxes on e
l
ectron
i
c
c
ommerce under the Internet Tax Freedom Act. This moratorium was scheduled to ex
p
ire in November 2007, an
d
i
ts extens
i
on preserve
d
t
h
e “gran
df
at
h
er
i
ng” o
f
states t
h
at taxe
d
Internet access
b
e
f
ore Octo
b
er 1998 to a
ll
ow t
h
e
m
t
o cont
i
nue to
d
o so. T
h
e morator
i
um
d
oes not app
l
y to taxes
l
ev
i
e
d
or measure
d
on net
i
ncome, net wort
h
o
r
p
ropert
y
value and does not extend to a tax on telecommunications services. Certain states have enacted variou
s
t
axes on Internet access or e
l
ectron
i
c commerce, an
d
se
l
ecte
d
states’ taxes are
b
e
i
ng conteste
d
. State tax
l
aws may
n
ot
b
e success
f
u
ll
y conteste
d
an
df
uture state an
df
e
d
era
ll
aws
i
mpos
i
ng taxes or ot
h
er regu
l
at
i
ons on Internet acces
s
and electronic commerce ma
y
arise, an
y
of which could increase the cost of our services and could materiall
y
and
a
d
verse
l
ya
ff
ect our
b
us
i
ness
.
Intellectual Pro
p
ert
y
We rev
i
ew our tec
h
no
l
og
i
ca
ld
eve
l
opments w
i
t
h
our tec
h
no
l
ogy sta
ff
an
db
us
i
ness un
i
ts to
id
ent
if
yan
d
captur
e
i
nnovative and novel features of our core technolo
gy
that provide us with commercial advanta
g
es and file paten
t
applications as necessar
y
to protect these features both in the United States and elsewhere. We hold 31 issued United
S
tates patents, an
d
we a
l
so
h
ave we
ll
over 100 pen
di
ng Un
i
te
d
States patent app
li
cat
i
ons. We current
l
y
h
o
ld
22
i
ssued patents and have numerous pendin
g
patent applications in various forei
g
n
j
urisdictions. Assumin
g
that all
m
aintenance fees and annuities continue to be
p
aid, the United States
p
atents ex
p
ire on various dates from 2017
unt
il
2
0
27.
24