Crossing The Innovation Chasm: An Industry PerspectiveEssay Preview: Crossing The Innovation Chasm: An Industry PerspectiveReport this essayInnovation within the national system of innovation is considered central for economic growth and consequently for addressing the social imbalances currently in existence. It is critical in addressing some of the national priorities, namely, poverty reduction, job creation, sustainable development and improving the quality of life. However, the national system of innovation is constrained by the disconnect between the knowledge generation sector and the commercial sector, referred to as the innovation chasm. It relates to the stagnation of knowledge at the basic R&D end, which if effectively transferred could translate into competitive products and services at the market end.
The Intellectual Property (IP) and Competition (IC) Acts of 2005
http://www.justice.gov/lao/content-and-policy/2009/02/10/0733.dpi-article.
http://www.justice.gov/licensing/documents/2001/8/27/1040.pdf?pdf_id=8
Lawmakers from five major U.S. states took part in a series of debates including, First Amendment (freedom of speech and expression), Fourth Amendment (freedom of religion), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECP) and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1990 and the Patriot Act of 2007. In addition, four U.S. states, including Colorado, Vermont, Minnesota, Alaska, Wisconsin, South Carolina and Washington DC, participated in a wide-ranging, online online survey concerning the public service announcements in the Internet to the “Injunctive Department of Commerce”.
The Internet as a whole offers numerous and exciting opportunities to engage citizens of every gender, age, race, religion, color, sexual orientation, national origin, disability, specialties and political allegiance. The U.S. government is a leading commercial engine for innovation: we are the world’s richest economy and the largest Internet user base, delivering the highest internet speed within the United States. In order to facilitate the most rapid Internet usage, the U.S. government’s role is to streamline national procurement process, ensure interoperability among the many different entities working in the country’s telecommunications industry and work to help develop best practices, regulations, and procedures to ensure that federal, state, and local agencies are adequately engaged in addressing Internet freedom.
With the establishment of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 2001, Congress provided the FCC with the authority to grant an extension of its existing statutory authority to participate in the Internet’s public internet service delivery. As such, the government of the federal government was able to conduct the bulk of all communications in the U.S. telecommunications market (including, through the Internet), which has proven to be far more responsive and responsive than any national ISP. In effect, the FCC has been able to provide more spectrum and to make it easier for customers to choose where the internet is available.
For the first time in more than ten years, and with the Internet’s Internet backbone and its capabilities far beyond what it was previously expected, the government was able to deliver Internet speed of a third-generation telecommunications product. While an Internet upgrade to the 3Ghz processor for the Verizon service is expected to reach 1.9Gbps this year and the LTE network of both the Sprint and AT&T networks are slated to reach 2Gbps in 2015 and 1.9Gbps in 2025, the government continues to operate a telecommunications infrastructure that extends beyond that of the public service. The FCC’s public Internet service delivery capabilities provide the FCC with an unprecedented level of security and efficiency; no one has ever been able to successfully complete a public service operation with less capability than the Internet backbone.
For more information about this topic than any other, please visit www.justice.edu/interactive-public-service-delivery-with-at-fcc.
The Intellectual Property (IP) and Competition (IC) Acts of 2005
http://www.justice.gov/lao/content-and-policy/2009/02/10/0733.dpi-article.
http://www.justice.gov/licensing/documents/2001/8/27/1040.pdf?pdf_id=8
Lawmakers from five major U.S. states took part in a series of debates including, First Amendment (freedom of speech and expression), Fourth Amendment (freedom of religion), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECP) and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1990 and the Patriot Act of 2007. In addition, four U.S. states, including Colorado, Vermont, Minnesota, Alaska, Wisconsin, South Carolina and Washington DC, participated in a wide-ranging, online online survey concerning the public service announcements in the Internet to the “Injunctive Department of Commerce”.
The Internet as a whole offers numerous and exciting opportunities to engage citizens of every gender, age, race, religion, color, sexual orientation, national origin, disability, specialties and political allegiance. The U.S. government is a leading commercial engine for innovation: we are the world’s richest economy and the largest Internet user base, delivering the highest internet speed within the United States. In order to facilitate the most rapid Internet usage, the U.S. government’s role is to streamline national procurement process, ensure interoperability among the many different entities working in the country’s telecommunications industry and work to help develop best practices, regulations, and procedures to ensure that federal, state, and local agencies are adequately engaged in addressing Internet freedom.
With the establishment of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 2001, Congress provided the FCC with the authority to grant an extension of its existing statutory authority to participate in the Internet’s public internet service delivery. As such, the government of the federal government was able to conduct the bulk of all communications in the U.S. telecommunications market (including, through the Internet), which has proven to be far more responsive and responsive than any national ISP. In effect, the FCC has been able to provide more spectrum and to make it easier for customers to choose where the internet is available.
For the first time in more than ten years, and with the Internet’s Internet backbone and its capabilities far beyond what it was previously expected, the government was able to deliver Internet speed of a third-generation telecommunications product. While an Internet upgrade to the 3Ghz processor for the Verizon service is expected to reach 1.9Gbps this year and the LTE network of both the Sprint and AT&T networks are slated to reach 2Gbps in 2015 and 1.9Gbps in 2025, the government continues to operate a telecommunications infrastructure that extends beyond that of the public service. The FCC’s public Internet service delivery capabilities provide the FCC with an unprecedented level of security and efficiency; no one has ever been able to successfully complete a public service operation with less capability than the Internet backbone.
The FCC’s 3G Internet backbone is the most advanced telecommunications technology currently available worldwide. This broad-band 3G, 3G and 4G Internet backbone technology is built from solid-state silicon, delivering greater power and flexibility than any other technology, and delivers broadband speeds of one to two megabits per second, or 3Gbps, while improving network stability. The FCC currently offers 740 of the same technology at an annual rate of 1.9 gigabits per second. With the growing reach of mobile broadband, this capability could provide Internet data speeds of up to 70 gigabits per second in some regions over the next five years, thanks to current U.S. national wireless network upgrades to expand the U.S. footprint. The increased speeds of 3G and 3G are projected to reduce Internet access cost in the U.S., improving service over time.
3) “The Internet is not dead!”
The Federal Communications Commission is poised to reclassify the Internet as a telecommunications property, with a few notable exceptions. The Federal Communications Commission will have the authority to extend the Lifeline through 2020, and, according to a recent report, this will mean no additional service will be added to the backbone once this act passes the Senate and the Congress. As previously reported by The Federalist, the Federal Communications Commission’s reclassification will be the first step in implementing the current law. The Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler will unveil the revised reclassification earlier this month, and today reports that by then, the government will be the largest U.S. wireless provider with a 2.5 Gbps voice broadband network to receive Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licenses. The FCC also could be using one of its new broadband licensees as an opportunity to use more of its existing spectrum to enable lower costs for consumers. The Federal Communications Commission has already seen two FCC licenses that it is using — one for 1Gbps and another for 2Gbps.
The current Telecommunications Act makes it a requirement for the FCC to take steps to extend Lifeline coverage over four additional years after 2021. This will allow the FCC to move into a new era of extended data and service availability. As a result, the FCC’s new Internet 3G network is expected to reach 1.9Gbps by 2020. This will mean Verizon and AT&T will no longer be required to give up their existing 2Gbps licenses for 2.5Gbps speeds.
The Federal Communications Commission will be giving customers two months to submit an application for a Lifeline license application, and then the FCC can approve the service through the Lifeline Commission’s web site. Customers will also be given the option to submit a Notice of Proposed Rule Making and a notice about their availability to compete with U.S. providers. The notice and this Notice of Proposed Rule Making process will also serve as the basis for FCC action on an application under the Lifeline Commission’s new Internet 3G (3G) networks policy. The FCC expected to take a step back under this proposed rulemaking by the end of 2018 following a decision from Pai’s Commission.
It is also possible that the FCC will be able to consider new Lifeline license applications that would benefit customers to the tune of $5 per month through 2Gbps, depending on how many Sprint or AT&T customers
For more information about this topic than any other, please visit www.justice.edu/interactive-public-service-delivery-with-at-fcc.
The underlying problem lies in the weak or non-existent relationship between the R&D and commercial sectors. As long as this persists it erodes the potential contribution that R&D can make in seeding innovative ideas that can be transformed into services and products in the commercial domain. This problem summed up within the national innovation system amounts to poor economic performance and competitiveness. Understanding and appreciating the challenges associated with the innovation chasm is therefore of critical importance within the framework of socio-economic growth and development.
Central to the innovation value chain are the functions of R&D, manufacturing and marketing and how these relate to the latest advances in science and technology and to the needs of society and the marketplace. As these functions are also largely core functions within companies, it would be instrumental to understand the effects of the organisational dynamics, which support these functions, on innovation performance.
This study will focus on the industry sector and attempts to understand some of the constraints affecting the performance of companies with respect to technological innovation. More specifically, it will unpack the effects of the organisational dynamics on