Silicon Valley is the king of Internet innovation. But that doesn’t mean the valley can ignore sovereign powers — particularly when their actions could threaten its lifeblood: global Internet freedom.

In December, the innocuous-sounding World Conference on International Telecommunications will be held in Dubai. Its stated purpose is to update the international telecom ground rules for things like global interoperability of networks and exchanges of telecom traffic between countries.

But concern is growing that a number of governments intend to exploit the Dubai meeting to change the rules governing the Internet. These changes would position the United Nations, via the International Telecommunication Union, as the global Internet regulator. They could also give individual governments much more power over the role of the Internet in their respective countries.

Already, proposals are floating back and forth among government officials around the world. The process has been criticized for its lack of transparency — so much so that at least one website has popped up, taking a page from the WikiLeaks playbook and publishing discussion drafts of confidential governmental proposals.

In the United States, recent congressional hearings were eye-opening. Robert McDowell, a member of the Federal Communications Commission, testified that some governments want to use international mandates to charge certain Web destinations on a per-click basis, ostensibly to fund the build-out of broadband across the globe. “Google, iTunes, Facebook, and Netflix are mentioned most often as prime sources of funding,” McDowell added.

Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, noted that many countries “don’t share our view of the Internet and how it operates.” That’s putting it politely.

Vint Cerf is Google’s “Internet evangelist,” often referred to as the father of the Internet for helping create the TCP/IP protocol. He said the Dubai meeting could lead to “top-down control dictated by governments,” potentially affecting free expression and strengthening authoritarian regimes. “The open Internet has never been at a higher risk than it is now,” he said.

In this country, fortunately, the Obama administration, Congress, the business community and public interest groups appear to be united in opposition to significant changes to Internet governance. A resolution supporting existing policies, introduced by Rep. Mary Bono-Mack, a California Republican, passed unanimously earlier this month. A counterpart has been introduced in the Senate.

But that doesn’t mean the Internet and Silicon Valley are out of the woods. Although the United States appears to be of one mind, Cerf noted in the Congressional hearing that we can’t meet this challenge alone. We’re going to need the support of other countries. And we have to practice what we preach.

Abroad, we need to encourage like-minded governments, nongovernmental organizations and civil society groups to speak up. Silicon Valley can be a game-changer by talking about the benefits of a free and open Internet with foreign business partners, vendors, subsidiaries and affiliates, and encouraging their governments to resist proposals that could undermine a free and open Internet.

Whenever, wherever a free and open Internet is threatened, Silicon Valley’s prosperity is potential collateral damage. To resist these threats, Silicon Valley needs to stay informed and vigilant — and be ready to act.

*A version of this article appeared in the August 13, 2012 issue of the San Jose Mercury News.

It usually takes fresh thinking to bring about positive changes in government, and sometimes it takes fresh faces.  We had a great example of that in Silicon Valley last week as Jessica Rosenworcel and Ajit Pai, the two new Commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), visited with a coalition of technology business leaders to discuss ways to foster innovation and economic growth in tech industries, particularly telecommunications.

What made this visit so refreshing is that it involved two senior regulators going to Silicon Valley to listen to entrepreneurs and innovators and better understand the needs of the high-tech community. To make business work and to keep entrepreneurs innovating, the right business environment must be in place – an environment that promotes and accelerates the invention and application of new devices and technologies.  The FCC is key to helping establish an environment that promotes regulatory certainty to enable growth and innovation throughout the entire telecom ecosystem.

In recent speeches and statements, both of these Commissioners have addressed the need for quicker decision making by the FCC and leadership to advance infrastructure investment throughout the industry.  For example, Commissioner Pai recently stated that “the FCC should be as nimble as the industry we oversee”, he said the FCC should ensure that it isn’t a barrier to investment and innovation – by making well thought out but quicker decisions in order to spur broadband investment, facilitate growth and create jobs in telecom.

Commissioner Rosenworcel acknowledged during her visit, how the high tech sector promotes innovation with speed and alacrity.  After meeting with industry leaders, Commissioner Rosenworcel noted that “[t]he digital economy is growing fast and there are lessons to learn from its energy.”  Technology changes rapidly – new devices are invented, new applications are created, new services are brought online and new opportunities enrich consumers’ lives.

To keep our high tech sector growing and innovating, the nation’s policymakers should ensure that we eliminate unnecessary and burdensome barriers that innovators and entrepreneurs face when deciding to invest and deploy in the next generation of facilities, services and applications.  In order to continue our leadership role in the deployment of advanced broadband services, the high tech sector needs regulatory certainty, and quick FCC decision making.  A strong, bipartisan approach will be needed to set the right policies for our high tech economy to thrive.  Fortunately for the FCC, two Commissioners last week took the time to witness what is needed first hand and to listen to the experts — and who came back to DC showing that they understand the needs of our Nation’s high tech community.

We look forward to new and exciting prospects for consumers in technology, and we look forward to the continued great work of Commissioners Pai and Rosenworcel.

If you run or bike while listening to music and want to keep your eyes on the road, the smartphone is your friend.  An iPod is great, but it doesn’t give you the variety a smartphone offers.  Today, we don’t really need to carry multiple single-use devices.  Today’s smartphones incorporate many of the following standard-use items:

• Phones
• Music Players
• Televisions
• Computers
• Flashlights
• Cameras
• Phone Books
• Maps
• Newspapers

Of course, not every item is necessary if you’re training for a marathon like our interviewee is here, but why carry more than one device if you’ve got to carry anything at all?

See our interview with Lauren, a marathon runner who uses her iPhone during long practice runs.

Let’s face it—we all need our smartphones.  Not only are they essential for communication, but for the all the other apps that we rely on every day.  Google maps to get us where we need to be, iCal for those meeting reminders, and of course Angry Birds to provide us with that much needed distraction from what we’re REALLY supposed to be doing.  We wanted to find out just how attached people are to their smartphones.  CALinnovates went to UCLA to ask people what they’d be willing to give up for a year before they gave up their smartphone.  Here’s what they had to say: