Clearwire 2008 Annual Report Download - page 50

I
na
ddi
t
i
on, t
h
e FCC or ot
h
er regu
l
atory aut
h
or
i
t
i
es may
i
nt
h
e
f
uture restr
i
ct our a
bili
ty to manage su
b
scr
ib
ers’
use o
f
our networ
k
,t
h
ere
b
y
li
m
i
t
i
ng our a
bili
ty to prevent or manage su
b
scr
ib
ers’ excess
i
ve
b
an
d
w
id
t
hd
eman
d
s. To
m
aintain the qualit
y
of our network and user experience, we mana
g
e our network b
y
limitin
g
the bandwidth used b
y
our subscribers’ applications, in part b
y
restrictin
g
the t
y
pes of applications that ma
y
be used over our network
.
These practices are set forth in our Acceptable Use Polic
y
. Some providers and users of these applications have
ob
j
ected to this practice. If the FCC or other re
g
ulator
y
authorities were to adopt re
g
ulations that constrain ou
r
ability to employ bandwidth management practices, excessive use of bandwidth-intensive applications would likel
y
r
educe the quality of our services for all subscribers. A decline in the quality of our services could harm ou
r
b
us
i
ness, or even resu
l
t
i
n
li
t
i
gat
i
on
f
rom
di
ssat
i
s
fi
e
d
su
b
scr
ib
ers
.
I
n certain of our international markets, we ma
y
be required to obtain a license for the use of re
g
ulated radio
frequencies from national, provincial or local regulatory authorities before providing our services. Where required
,
r
egu
l
atory aut
h
or
i
t
i
es may
h
ave s
i
gn
ifi
cant
di
scret
i
on
i
n grant
i
ng t
h
e
li
censes an
di
n
d
eterm
i
n
i
ng t
h
e con
di
t
i
ons
f
or
use o
f
t
h
e
f
requenc
i
es covere
db
yt
h
e
li
censes, an
d
are o
f
ten un
d
er no o
bli
gat
i
on to renew t
h
e
li
censes w
h
en t
h
ey
e
xp
i
re. A
ddi
t
i
ona
ll
y, even w
h
ere we current
l
y
h
o
ld
a
li
cense or success
f
u
ll
yo
b
ta
i
na
li
cense
i
nt
h
e
f
uture, we may
be
r
equ
i
re
d
to see
k
mo
difi
cat
i
ons to t
h
e
li
cense or t
h
e regu
l
at
i
ons app
li
ca
bl
etot
h
e
li
cense to
i
mp
l
ement our
b
us
i
nes
s
s
trate
gy
. For examp
l
e,
i
n certa
i
n
i
nternat
i
ona
l
mar
k
ets, t
h
e
li
censes we
h
o
ld
,an
d
t
h
e app
li
ca
bl
eru
l
es an
d
r
e
g
u
l
at
i
ons, current
ly d
o not spec
ifi
ca
lly
perm
i
t us to prov
id
emo
bil
e serv
i
ces. T
h
us,
b
e
f
ore o
ff
er
i
n
g
mo
bil
e
s
ervices to our subscribers in those markets, absent action b
y
the re
g
ulator
y
authorities to modif
y
the licenses an
d
applicable rules, we ma
y
need to obtain the approval of the proper re
g
ulator
y
authorities
.
Th
e
b
reac
h
o
f
a
li
cense or a
ppli
ca
bl
e
l
aw, even
if i
na
d
vertent, can resu
l
t
i
nt
h
e revocat
i
on, sus
p
ens
i
on
,
c
ancellation or reduction in the term of a license or the imposition of fines. In addition, re
g
ulator
y
authorities ma
y
g
rant new licenses to third parties, resultin
g
in
g
reater competition in territories where we alread
y
have ri
g
hts t
o
licensed spectrum. In order to promote competition, licenses ma
y
also require that third parties be
g
ranted access t
o
our bandwidth, frequenc
y
capacit
y
, facilities or services. We ma
y
not be able to obtain or retain an
y
required license,
and we ma
y
not be able to renew our licenses on favorable terms, or at all.
O
ur wireless broadband and VoIP telephon
y
services ma
y
become sub
j
ect to
g
reater or different state or federa
l
r
e
g
ulation in the future. The scope of an
y
additional re
g
ulations or chan
g
es in the existin
g
re
g
ulations that ma
y
appl
y
to 2.
5
GHz wireless broadband and VoIP telephon
y
services providers and the impact of such re
g
ulations on
p
roviders’ competitive position are presently unknown
.
We ma
yb
e una
bl
eto
p
rotect our inte
ll
ectua
lp
ro
p
ert
y
,w
h
ic
h
cou
ld
re
d
uce t
h
eva
l
ue o
f
our services an
d
o
ur
b
ran
d.
O
ur abilit
y
to compete effectivel
y
depends on our abilit
y
to protect our proprietar
y
network and s
y
ste
m
desi
g
ns. We ma
y
not be able to safe
g
uard and maintain our proprietar
y
ri
g
hts. We rel
y
on patents, trademarks an
d
p
olicies and procedures related to confidentiality to protect our intellectual property. Some of our intellectual
p
roperty,
h
owever,
i
s not covere
db
yanyo
f
t
h
ese protect
i
ons. Any
f
a
il
ure to protect our
i
nte
ll
ectua
l
property,
i
nc
l
u
di
ng a
f
a
il
ure to o
b
ta
i
n requeste
d
patents or tra
d
emar
k
reg
i
strat
i
ons, may re
d
uce t
h
eva
l
ue o
f
our serv
i
ces an
d
our
b
ran
d
or may resu
l
t
i
nt
h
e
l
oss o
f
r
i
g
h
ts
i
nw
hi
c
h
we
h
ave
i
nveste
d
s
i
gn
ifi
cant t
i
me or costs.
O
ur pendin
g
patent applications ma
y
not be
g
ranted or, in the case of patents issued or to be issued, the claims
allowed may not be sufficiently broad to protect our intellectual property. Even if all of our patent applications wer
e
i
ssued and were sufficiently broad, our patents may be challenged or invalidated. In addition, the United States
P
atent an
d
Tra
d
emar
k
O
ffi
ce ma
y
not
g
rant
f
e
d
era
l
re
gi
strat
i
ons
b
ase
d
on our pen
di
n
g
tra
d
emar
k
app
li
cat
i
ons. Even
if f
e
d
era
l
re
gi
strat
i
ons are
g
rante
d
,t
h
ese tra
d
emar
k
r
igh
ts ma
yb
ec
h
a
ll
en
g
e
d
. Moreover, patent an
d
tra
d
emar
k
app
li
cat
i
ons
fil
e
di
n
f
ore
ig
n countr
i
es ma
yb
esu
bj
ect to
l
aws, ru
l
es an
d
proce
d
ures t
h
at are su
b
stant
i
a
lly diff
erent
from those of the United States, and an
y
forei
g
n patents ma
y
be difficult and expensive to obtain and enforce. We
c
ould, therefore, incur substantial costs in prosecutin
g
patent and trademark infrin
g
ement suits or otherwis
e
p
rotectin
g
our intellectual propert
y
ri
g
hts.
38