The term “metaverse” has become a thing again because Mark Zuckerberg has decided to wholeheartedly embrace the idea of a 3D, interactive world where users can work, play and be entertained, even changing Facebook’s holding company name to Meta. 

So while the social media mavens continue to tout how the cool kids will use whatever Silicon Valley can throw at them to interact with content, create creepy little avatars of themselves while they talk to and text their friends’ equally creepy-looking avatars and play games and whatnot using advanced augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technology, just remember that this is really nothing new. 

It’s being touted as a revolution but for me, a person definitely way outside the target audience for these products, we’ve been down this road before. Interacting with content is nothing new for media watchers — we’ve been talking about it ever since Time Warner Cable launched the Full Service Network back in the 1990s. And with streaming and ultra high-speed broadband outpacing more traditional forms of entertainment consumption, media types have long prepared for this inevitable evolution.  

But the media business has never met a buzzword that it couldn’t beat to death and for the moment, “metaverse” appears to fit that bill. According to Bernstein Research, “metaverse” mentions on public company conference calls rose from just one in Q2 2020 to 449 in 3Q 2021.

Even actor Keanu Reeves, an owner of bitcoin and enthusiastic embracer of technology — he’s Neo, for gosh sakes — has asked for the metaverse hype to be turned down a notch, telling The Verge during the press tour for the upcoming Matrix: Resurrections movie that the term is decades old. 

Also: Meta May Not Be Betta But it Still Matters to Streaming Video’s Future  

“Can we just not have metaverse be like invented by Facebook?” Reeves told The Verge. “The concept of the metaverse is like, way older. It’s like, c’mon man.”  

Bernstein Research hosted a conference call with its clients about the metaverse on Dec. 10 (a transcript was provided on Dec. 16) and for software developers and hardware manufacturers it appears that momentum is going their way.

According to Bernstein, the metaverse could represent a $2 trillion annual revenue opportunity, but there is a big question regarding timing: nobody knows exactly when that opportunity will come. Still, that revenue is expected to come from multiple sources — advertising, gaming, software, mobile apps and more — and some is even being spent to some extent today.  

“Companies are already spending to build it [the metaverse] and that costs real capital dollars,” Bernstein Internet analyst Mark Schmulik said on the call. “As they build it, we're already starting to see certain companies like Meta gain traction in hardware sales and related software sales. While it's still too early to draw a line of whether that's going to be successful or not, it's certainly underway.” 

That includes cable and telecom companies, which see the metaverse as another catalyst to drive the need for higher speeds. On the Dec. 10 Bernstein call, cable and telecom analyst Peter Supino noted that he expects 80 million U.S. homes to have at least one way to purchase Gigabit symmetrical service by 2025. 

And while wireless has been capacity constrained in the past, Supino noted that about 500 megahertz of mid-band spectrum has been reallocated by the Big Three carriers (AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile) to 5G. 

The metaverse also is important to the cloud services business, because connecting as many machines as possible is a big priority. And that need for connectivity could be a potential boon for Dish Network, which has about 100 MHz of fallow wireless spectrum and partnership possibilities with Amazon Web Services, Azure or Google Cloud. 

“Dish is an unencumbered, high capacity link between the industrial metaverse and the cloud service providers that would like to serve and foster it,” Supino said.

But on the media and entertainment side, the benefits of the metaverse aren’t so clear.

Bernstein media analyst Todd Juenger admitted he was a “card-carrying” cynic when it comes to the Metaverse, adding that with all the hype surrounding the industry’s latest buzzword, he’s feeling more than a little déjà vu.  

Also: A Deeper Look At the Netflix VR Environment 

“The reason I'm cynical is that I feel like I've seen this before in media and entertainment,” Juenger said according to the transcript. “To me, the metaverse just sounds like a new word to describe an evolution that's naturally happening anyway.”

He then went on to offer an example. Remember 3D? Not too long ago, in the wake of James Cameron’s Avatar, the most successful 3D movie ever made, all content was supposed to be 3D, movies, television, networks began springing up all over the place. In 2010, ESPN was set to launch a 3D channel, Discovery was teaming up with Sony and IMAX to launch a 24-hour linear 3D network with movies, documentaries and children's programming and electronics vendors were scrambling to introduce 3D TVs to satiate what they expected to be tremendous demand. 

I don’t have to tell you what happened, but I’ll let Juenger tell you why it did anyway. 

“A couple years go by and where is 3D, right?,” Juenger said. “It was just [that] consumers didn't like it. They didn't benefit from it. It was almost being forced upon them.”

Sound familiar?

Also: A New Reality Check for VR and AR 

Juenger went on to talk about AR, which was all the rage a few years ago, fueled by Pokémon Go, the mobile game that had young and old alike wandering into traffic to capture little AR anime figures. That was supposed to take the video game business by storm and again, it didn’t. Juenger recalled that while Pokémon Go was a massive success and its still going relatively strong, it remains the go-to example of AR’s supposed takeover of the video game business a half decade after its introduction. 

“It's funny that when we talk about AR when it relates to media, we still have to use Pokémon Go as the example, right?” Juenger said, noting that in the entertainment business, everybody copies everybody else, but so far that hasn’t happened with AR. 

“If AR is a big idea, where are the other AR video games?” Juenger said. “Why do we still have to point to Pokémon Go?”

Juenger wasn’t denying the opportunity that a new and improved metaverse presents. He just believes that the concern as to whether media and entertainment companies will take advantage of it is a bit misplaced.They already seem to be doing it. 

Also: Ripley Says Bally Sports Net DTC Offering Will Be Lean-Forward Experience 

“When it comes to entertainment, I will say the content creation will follow the technology platforms.” Juenger said. “I don't deny that there will be a big advancement in devices people use and [are] using social elements of entertainment, which incorporates elements of what we call the metaverse.”

Juenger, who also follows the video game industry, said that Roblox, the online platform that allows people to play games created by other users, already bills itself as a metaverse. The difference between Roblox games and more traditional games like Grand Theft Auto, he said, is that a user can move his Roblox avatar through different games. 

“I'm not sure you even want to take your GTA persona and move it into a different game, so maybe those will just stay separate,” Juenger said. “In terms of VR and AR games — in VR games, every major publisher makes some — but they all tell you that they just earn the minimum. And the only reason they do it is not really to make money, it's really just to stay involved and to build capabilities in case this takes off.” 

Even Disney has jumped on the metaverse bandwagon, envisioning a merger of the physical and virtual worlds in its theme park experiences, which Juenger said, although a  bit cringe-worthy, probably makes sense. 

“To me, that just sounds like an idea of a Disney video game,” Juenger said, adding that the prevailing wisdom that only huge conglomerates can afford to take advantage of metaverse opportunities may not hold true. 

Sure, the mega-media giants like Disney have all the money, technology and resources and have managed to build huge communities with their brands, but their size can make them slow to react to changes in the business. With development getting easier and faster and distribution barriers being shattered across the landscape, Juenger said some believe it is time to consider smaller, faster, more advanced startups to displace some of their older, larger competitors.    

“This is all still new enough and video games are inherently innovative,” Juenger said. “I would bet on the big IPs. But I think it's an evolution, not a revolution. Video game manufacturers — they've gone through a lot of change already. I think this is just another one.” 

Other analysts have delved into the metaverse conversation, with Evercore ISI Internet analyst Mark Mahaney issuing a 33-page report on December 10 that highlighted the pros and cons of the technology. Pros: there is a lot of money to be made. Cons: It’s going to take a big change in consumer behavior to realize that revenue.

On the plus side, Mahaney said Meta (the former Facebook) is putting its money where its vision is, investing more than $10 billion annually in the concept, has about 3.5 billion monthly users in its family of apps that are already engaging in what is most likely the core use of the metaverse (social media); and has the majority of the VR device business through Oculus Quest. And the pandemic has shown that consumers are willing to interact more online -- Zoom went from 10 million data meeting participants in 2019 to 300 million by April 2020. Roblox has more than 47 million DAUs that average 2.6 hours per day on the platform in Q3 2021, and while VR adoption is still nascent -- about 2% of monthly users on Steam -- it is rising.

But there’s a downside too. According to Mahaney’s report, the biggest question is whether enough consumers will swap “real” reality for virtual reality or whether VR will just be another niche product. And then there is the technology part of the metaverse. Zuckerberg has said that the biggest challenge for the industry is cramming a super-computer into the frame of normal-looking eyeglasses. 

“Ultimately, we need high-fidelity graphics, low latency, with hundreds of millions of concurrent users in real-time at a relatively cheap price point,” Mahaney wrote.

That, to me, is going to be the real deciding factor in this. People have different expectations as to how the metaverse will look and feel and I will bet you that none of them has a basis in the current reality.

The technology industry is really good at driving interest and excitement about technology, but it takes time for these things to deliver what’s being promised. And now they are talking about a technology that in order to work as promised is literally going to have billions of users accessing servers and whatnot simultaneously. Just think of how annoyed you get when Netflix takes too much time to load a movie and multiply that by 1,000 or so when your virtual jaunt through the rainforest crashes into a sea of pixels. 

And then there are the social and privacy aspects. It’s probably a safe bet that to keep the cost of these products and services down, people are going to have to give up a load of personal data. Sure many are doing that already, but you’ve got to wonder how much more everyone is going to have to surrender to make a low-cost metaverse worthwhile. 

And as far as the social impact, while most people have spent a year in isolation, when they get a chance to go out and interact with actual people, they do it in droves. The news is full of stories of people, young and old, that risked going to large gatherings during the outbreak. Heck, just yesterday (December 16), AMC Theaters said that 1.1 million people went outside to an actual movie theater to watch Spiderman: No Way Home, the second largest box office day in AMC’s history  (The Avengers: Endgame was No. 1). 

So I guess what I’m saying is that for the metaverse to really be worth the hype, it has to deliver on its promises. If it doesn’t, it risks turning consumers off of the concept, or at least substantially delaying its acceptance until it resurfaces years later with another name -- my vote is for  Vitametamegaverse (“It’s So Tasty Too!”). And that’s another thing that this industry has seen before.  ■ 

Niantic says its Pokémon Go mobile app collects user information, which Niantic shares "from time to time" with third parties for marketing and other purposes, but not share that information for anyone under 13.

That came in a letter to Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who had sought information from the company given the runaway popularity, including among teens and kids, and its collection of user information for the game.

But Niantic says it does not sell Pokémon Go information to third parties, "aggregated, de-identified or otherwise"--and has no plans to do so.

Related: PokéSTOP!: CCFC Warns Against Kid-Targeted Ads

Niantic is a Google spin-off and in which Google is still part owner. But Niantic says it does not share user information with its investors, though it does share info with Google as a third-party app developer.

Niantic also collects detailed location information on its users when the application is open--such info is integral to the augmented reality experience of the game, and stores it for a maximum of 120 days. Niantic said it does not do background collection of information when the app is closed.

The company also assured Franken it had fixed an error in the Pokémon Go iOS account creation process that had requested users signing into a Google account to provide full account permissions. It now asks only for limited account permissions. It said Google had provided a server-side fix to the problem.

Franken dubbed the Niantic response comprehensive," but still plans to have his staffers meet with officials to clarify some of its answers.

“The launch of Pokémon GO earlier this summer represented a new era in gaming, but shortly after the app's release, there were strong concerns about how it treats its users' digital data,” said Franken. “Now I believe that Americans have a fundamental right to privacy—and that right includes access to clear and comprehensive information about how users' personal information is treated. That’s why I pressed app maker Niantic to detail how Pokémon GO collects, uses, and shares its users' information. I appreciate Niantic’s response, but I intend to work further with the company in the future to ensure that we’re doing everything possible to protect the privacy of Americans—particularly American children—who play Pokémon GO.”

Franken has long been concerned about location privacy issues, like stalker apps and info collection by Web sites.

WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission is getting flooded with comments asking it to “please protect our free data.”

The FCC is currently investigating zero-rating plans — in which some video content does not count against broadband-usage caps — from a handful of top ISPs as part of its general- conduct standard of review for business practices that could impede a free and open Internet. The review was also prompted by a complaint fi led against Comcast’s Stream TV.

A check of the FCC docket on open Internet issues finds a flurry of form letters — the majority of the several thousand comments filed over the past couple of weeks — in two different variations, but making the same point. Many appear to have been generated from an online form set up by Phone2Action, a boutique firm providing grassroots online activism tools for clients and headed by, among others, former Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty.

“Free data plans are new and innovative services that give you ‘free’ content as part of your existing wireless data plan,” reads one of the letters, which then details their many upsides.

The dark cloud on that sunny horizon, the commenters suggest, is Washington, D.C. “We must act now to protect these free data plans from regulators and policymakers,” the letter reads, adding that companies should be encouraged to find more ways for users to feed their growing mobile appetites, not less, and for Washington to allow the Internet “we all love and rely upon” to “grow and evolve.”

Broadband providers argue that zero-rating plans are a user-friendly way to differentiate service — for example, T-Mobile zero-rated Pokémon Go as a way to differentiate its service as the wildly popular VR game swept the nation. On the other side, opponents argue zero rating is a pay-to-play way for some services to get an unfair advantage and divide the net into haves and have nots.

It might not be an either-or proposition. The FCC could decide that the plans are OK in some circumstances, but anticompetitive in others.

Former Democratic FCC chairman Reed Hundt has said he thought the FCC would have to allow for some form of zero-rating plans. Asked at the Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council’s 14th annual Access to Capital and Telecom Policy Conference in Washington, D.C., about the FCC’s current investigation into zero-rating plans, Hundt said he thought the agency was going to have to decide that people — in this case, broadband providers that carve specific services out from usage-based pricing plans — are going to have to be allowed to give things away for free.

“Being against free is not very popular,” Hundt added — except with such groups as MoveOn.org, Color-Of- Change, Center for Media Justice, Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, Free Press and Open Technology Institute. They told the FCC that zero-rating plans could “break the net,” urging action be taken on the strength of more than 100,000 comments critical of the practice.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler in June said the FCC continues to investigate the rating plans, but did not signal any imminent decision on them.

Spend any time outdoors lately and you've likely noted an exceptional uptick in smartphone walker s— slower with the steps, eyes fixed on tiny screens. However you feel about the Pokemon Go phenomenon, it was only a matter of days before a leading wireless carrier offered free data to its customers playing the game. 

The move was the latest in a long line of savvy salvos in the intense, ongoing competition among regional and national wireless carriers to attract and keep customers.  Indeed, a look at advertising buys over the past year reveals no fewer than 35 wireless companies taking to the airwaves some 440,000 times to make their case to consumers.   

Mobile Future conducted a recent video project aimed at capturing the frenetic pace and free-wheeling diversity of the wireless wars. You can watch it here.

Anyone who questions the competitiveness of the U.S. wireless marketplace need only turn on their television. The top four national wireless providers are routinely ranked among the top 10 U.S. advertising spenders as each seeks to one-up the other with attractive consumer deals and claims of network superiority.   

These intensive rivalries are not only a reality—but the defining reality of the modern U.S. mobile marketplace. And, the constant swirl and evolution of competitive offerings clearly empower consumers. One company dumps contracts. Others follow suit.  Data rollover plans come on the market. Rivals respond in kind. Wireless companies are perpetually seeking new ways to find an edge.  

Clearly, data is the belle of the ball: How much do you get, for what price and with what kind of rollover arrangement? Market rivals have a multitude of answers to these questions, and consumers freely sift through them for offerings that best suit their unique wireless way of life.   

One thing virtually all consumers agree on seems straight out of a Captain Obvious skit: Consumers are fans of free. They are all for new choices that allow them to use more data at less or no cost.  They appreciate, embrace and are excited for the free and low-cost offerings emerging in the marketplace. Indeed, a Mobile Future consumer survey found 88% of Americans did not want to see their government have any role in approving new wireless business models.  They want that job for themselves. 

\

Wireless competition abounds — to consumers’ and our nation's benefit: 

•      It's the reason a full 92% of Americans can choose from at least four wireless service providers — including three or more 4G offerings.  

•      It's the reason we reached President Obama's goal of connecting 98% of the country to the mobile Internet — a year ahead of schedule. 

•      It's the reason that the wireless consumer price index decreased by 45% since 1997 while overall consumer prices increased by 36% . 

•      It's the reason U.S. wireless companies lead the world in investment in next-generation 4G — and ultimately 5G — wireless networks.

•      And, yes, perhaps it’s partly responsible for an inordinate number of your neighbors having a close encounter with a tree this weekend.    

The point is: In today’s competitive wireless world, the choice is always yours as consumers.  Market rivals are racing every day to dream up new ways to win and keep your business — creating fresh opportunities for consumers to take full advantage of all that mobile innovation has to offer. These are tangible benefits every American can safely grasp and use to their benefit in the real world.  Take that, Pikachu.

Jonathan Spalter is chair of Mobile Future, a Washington, D.C.-based association of technology companies and nonprofit groups working to support investment and innovation in the wireless sector.

Sen. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) has asked both FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and Department of Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx to "align" Administration priorities (though the FCC is an independent agency) before coming up with rules for accommodating both incumbent licensed V2V communications still in the development stage, and unlicensed Wi-Fi currently being used across the country.

The FCC is trying to free up spectrum in the 5 GHz band (5.9 GHZ specifically) for Wi-Fi, cable ops principal mobile broadband play.

DOT and the FCC are working together on testing compatibility and guarding against interference.

But in a letter to Wheeler and Foxx, DeFazio urged them to make their decision in the public interest, not commercial interest.

"The promises of DRSC [dedicated short-range communications] include fewer motor vehicle fatalities...While I understand the desire for more unlicensed Wi-Fi spectrum, the desire for better Pokémon Go play cannot be compared to the 38,000 motor vehicle deaths every year," he told Wheeler and Foxx.

DeFazio opposes a petition that would delay the rollout of V2V while cybersecurity and privacy protections are implemented. he recognizes the need for those protections, but says it will take years for the technology to penetrate the market, so there will be time to deal with those issues before "broad deployment."

Public Knowledge, which is advocating for freeing up spectrum, says it agrees on protecting cybersecurity and privacy, and that those need to be addressed ASAP, but not with the need to launch DSRC ASAP. "“We respectfully disagree with Rep. DeFazio on the need to allow DSRC to go forward before cybersecurity and privacy concerns are fully resolved," said Public Knowledge SVP Harold Feld.

On June 1, the FCC issued a public notice on the 5.9 GHz band, including setting a January 2017 deadline for completing testing of sharing in the band.

Cable operators have been pushing for more 5 GHz spectrum to fuel their Wi-Fi hotspots, the industry's primary mobile broadband play.

The FCC has an open inquiry into using the band for unlicensed, and DOT has agreed on testing the co-existence of vehicle-to-vehicle communications (intelligent transportation system [ITS] devices) and Wi-Fi.

Wheeler joined by Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx, in January outlined a three-phase device-testing regime to potentially open up new spectrum in the 5.9-Gigahertz band for more cable WiFi hotspots without interfering with automobile crash-avoidance systems.

Unlicensed devices will have to pass all three tests before any conclusions are drawn about whether Wi-Fi and V2V can coexist.

That testing regime came amidst Hill pressure to find a resolution and free up the spectrum. At that time, the FCC signaled it would be refreshing the record.

The goal is clash avoidance as well as crash avoidance given that the cable and automotive industries have come together after tensions over whether the band could be opened up to unlicensed without threatening those nascent intelligent automotive systems.

Democratic ranking members from various committees and subcommittees are probing Pokémon Go developer Niantic on the impact of its wildly popular app on consumers' data usage plans.

One veteran game player suggested it was not a data-heavy application, but it is being played heavily across the country as any trip to the park or strip mall will attest.

The legislators cite reports of users maxing out their monthly data usage plans in a week of playing, and "complained of eating through an entire family plan within a few days."

In a letter dated July 19, Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Ranking Member Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) framed the issue:

"Pokémon Go has quickly become the biggest mobile game in U.S. history and within a week of its release has surpassed the average daily usage of popular social media platforms including Instagram and Snapchat.  Third-party testing has found that a typical Pokémon Go player uses 10-20 megabytes of data per hour of play and that serious users playing for several hours per day could use up to two gigabytes of data per month, leading to concerns that consumers could quickly consume their monthly cellular data allotment." 

THey asked the company the following questions, and they want answers by Aug. 9.

1. "Are there best practices that Niantic follows to minimize the amount of data consumers use when playing Pokémon Go?

2. "Has Niantic worked with wireless carriers to ensure that consumers are not unexpectedly hit with large overage charges? [The letter quotes T-Mobile CEO John Legere reporting that Pokemon Go users data usage had quadrupled in the past four days. T-Mobile is zeroing out the game from its usage plan for a year].

3. "Does Niantic conspicuously warn consumers before they start using the app about how much data the app consumes?

4. "Does Niantic have any mechanisms in place to make sure consumers are made whole in the event they are hit with an unexpected overage charge resulting from the use of the app?"

Related: IT Industry Group Calls for Workplace Ban On ‘Pokémon Go’

Like a lot of people, Dmitri Williams had never heard of Pokémon Go until it started trending on social media on Saturday, July 9 — and when his daughter downloaded it the next day.

“She said she wanted to go play with it outside,” said the CEO of gaming research firm Ninja Metrics and an associate professor at the University of Southern California. “That never happens, so I was all for it.”

SETS A SALES RECORD

By July 13, the augmented reality game had become the biggest mobile game in U.S. history, based on its 21 million active users, beating out 2013’s Candy Crush Saga and 2012 release Draw Something, according to data from SurveyMonkey. Three days into its release, Pokémon Go had more users than Twitter, and was No. 1 on both the Google and Apple App Store charts.

As of last Wednesday ( July 13), Pokémon Go attracted just under 21 million daily active users in the United States, surpassing Candy Crush Saga’s rumored peak U.S. smartphone audience of 20 million users and making it the biggest mobile game in the nation’s history.

How did a title from a little-known developer (Niantic) become an overnight hit? According to Williams and other analysts, the right confluence of events occurred: Smartphone usage is now ubiquitous; people are comfortable with using geolocation technologies; and the Pokémon franchise already had a dedicated fan base.

“You’ve got a perfect storm of social and technological things happening,” Williams said. “You can expect a zillion copy cats, because how these things work. This may or may not be a one-hit wonder, but gaming developers are creative, and they’ll do more with augmented reality than finding a Pokémon at your corner grocery store.”

Augmented reality (AR) games like Pokémon Go have been made before, and have been around for decades, Williams said. But this one could be a game-changer, he and other analysts said, that gets AR out from under virtual reality’s shadow.

“VR has been getting more of the headlines, but AR is consistently a more valuable technology,” Joost van Dreunen, CEO of New York-based video game data and analysis firm SuperData Research, said. “The two have long been lumped into the same bucket, but what Pokémon Go does is show everyone what can be done with AR, pushes it to the foreground.”

The consensus among industry observers is that the game’s novelty will wear out sooner rather than later, van Dreunen said. But Pokémon Go helped raise the stock of Nintendo — which has a 32% share of the franchise — by nearly 35% by the end of trading on July 13. So it’s a safe bet that others in the gaming and augmented reality space will look to repeat its success.

TEST OF TIME LOOMS

“This clearly demonstrates that AR can cross over into the mainstream on the devices people already have in at least some cases — you don’t need a bulky, expensive headset to use Pokémon Go, and that’s its power,” Jan Dawson, chief analyst with Jackdaw Research, said. “As such, it may help the concept of AR, but it doesn’t necessarily do anything for the kind of AR and VR experiences big companies are piling so much money into.”

The real test for Pokémon Go is whether people are still playing it weeks from now, Dawson said. That’s because the game is time-intensive, requires travel and relies on nice weather to keep users wandering around, looking for the hidden animals that make up the main part of the game. That combination won’t last forever, he said.

“The user experience has to be good, and they’ve done a good job on this,” Brian Blau, research vice president for per sonal technologies for Gartner, said. “But I don’t know if this changes the conversation for AR. AR games have been around on smartphones for a very long time. And they’re all gone now.”

If anything, Blau added, Pokémon Go was a much-needed shot in the arm for Nintendo and its investors, who’ve seen the gaming company lag behind rivals Sony and Microsoft for years.

Michael Pachter, managing director of equity research for Wedbush Securities, said much the same. The game brings together strong assets in Nintendo and Pokémon, but, “It’s only been a week, so premature to make the call on the game’s success.

“I think the success is more attributable to the intellectual property than to the game play. We’ll see if there is another successful AR game,” he said.

“My bias is that the game has challenges to remain on the top of the charts. It requires activity, which is anathema to couch potatoes, and sucks up battery life, which is anathema to Snapchat users,” Pachter added. “I think it will run its course at the top in a month or so.”

T-Mobile is jumping on the Pokémon Go bandwagon, announcing that it will zero-rate mobile data tied to the wildly popular mobile/augmented reality game starting next Tuesday (July 19) for a full year.

That’s one on Pokémon Go-related perk that T-Mobile is teeing up for its next “T-Mobile Tuesday” promotion.

RELATED: Sen. Franken Takes Aim at ‘Pokémon Go’

In addition to providing free, unlimited data on Pokémon Go for a year, T-Mobile is also offering free Lyft rides of up to $15 to get customers to a new PokéStop or Gym, a free Wendy’s Frosty for those “hunting” trips, plus a 50% discount on select accessories, including portable power packs.

Interested customers can redeem those offers by downloading the T-Mobile Tuesdays app.

T-Mobile CEO John Legere share the news on Twitter...

Ready to catch them all!? #TMobileTuesdays is giving you unlimited data use for #PokémonGo! https://t.co/NrFAxW3KYqpic.twitter.com/pPXxezGV0r

— John Legere (@JohnLegere) July 14, 2016

In addition to pushing the latest offer amid the rapid rise of Pokémon Go, which is already attracting a record 21 million daily users in the U.S., T-Mobile’s latest promo also enters play as the FCC and its chairman, Tom Wheeler, continue to vet information about zero rating plans and how they square with the Commission’s network neutrality rules. T-Mobile, which exempts data for more bandwidth-intensive video apps that are part of its Binge On program, has long-held that the use of zero-rating is well within those rules.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) has fired off a letter to “Pokémon Go” game developer Niantic raising alarm bells over the smartphone app's collection, use and sharing of user data in what the lawmaker calls potentially concerning ways.

Since the augmented reality app launched last week (July 6), it has been downloaded more than 7 million times and has kids and adults wandering highways, byways, parks and strip malls in search of Pokémon characters to capture or battle. It was even the subject of some pre-hearing chatter at an Federal Communications Commission oversight hearing Tuesday (July 12), and was then mentioned in passing by FCC chairman Tom Wheeler.

“Recent reports, as well as Pokémon Go’s own privacy policy, suggest that Niantic can collect a broad swath of personal information from its players,” Franken said in his letter to Niantic CEO John Hanke. “From a user’s general profile information to their precise location data and device identifiers, Niantic has access to a significant amount of information, unless users — many of whom are children — opt out of this collection.

“Pokémon Go’s privacy policy states that all of this information can then be shared with The Pokémon Company and ‘third party service providers,’ details for which are not provided, and further indicates that Pokémon Go may share de-identified or aggregated data with other third parties for a non-exhaustive list of purposes,” the senator continued. “Finally, Pokémon Go’s privacy policy specifically states that any information collected — including a child’s — ‘is considered to be a business asset’ and will thus be disclosed or transferred to a third party in the event that Niantic is party to a merger, acquisition, or other business transaction.

“I am concerned about the extent to which Niantic may be unnecessarily collecting, using, and sharing a wide range of users’ personal information without their appropriate consent,” Franken said in his letter. “I believe Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, and that right includes an individual’s access to information, as well as the ability to make meaningful choices, about what data are being collected about them and how the data are being used. As the augmented reality market evolves, I ask that you provide greater clarity on how Niantic is addressing issues of user privacy and security, particularly that of its younger players.”

The full text of the letter is reprinted below:

Mr. John Hanke, CEO                                                                       

Niantic, Inc.                           

Dear Mr. Hanke:

I am writing to request information about Niantic’s recently released augmented reality app, Pokémon GO, which – in less than a week’s time – has been downloaded approximately 7.5 million times in the United States alone. While this release is undoubtedly impressive, I am concerned about the extent to which Niantic may be unnecessarily collecting, using, and sharing a wide range of users’ personal information without their appropriate consent. I believe Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, and that right includes an individual’s access to information, as well as the ability to make meaningful choices, about what data are being collected about them and how the data are being used. As the augmented reality market evolves, I ask that you provide greater clarity on how Niantic is addressing issues of user privacy and security, particularly that of its younger players.

Recent reports, as well as Pokémon GO’s own privacy policy, suggest that Niantic can collect a broad swath of personal information from its players. From a user’s general profile information to their precise location data and device identifiers, Niantic has access to a significant amount of information, unless users – many of whom are children – opt-out of this collection. Pokémon GO’s privacy policy states that all of this information can then be shared with The Pokémon Company and “third party service providers”, details for which are not provided, and further indicates that Pokémon GO may share de-identified or aggregated data with other third parties for a non-exhaustive list of purposes. Finally, Pokémon GO’s privacy policy specifically states that any information collected – including a child’s – “is considered to be a business asset” and will thus be disclosed or transferred to a third party in the event that Niantic is party to a merger, acquisition, or other business transaction.

Media reports have also highlighted that Pokémon GO has full access to some users’ Google accounts, which includes their Gmail services. We recognize and commend Niantic for quickly responding to these specific concerns, and ask for continued assurance that a fix will be implemented swiftly. When done appropriately, the collection and use of personal information may enhance consumers’ augmented reality experience, but we must ensure that Americans’ – especially children’s – very sensitive information is protected.

In light of these uncertainties, I respectfully request that you respond to the following questions by August 12, 2016:

1.   Pokémon GO has stated that it collects a broad array of users’ personal information, including but not limited to a user’s profile and account information, their precise location data, and information obtained through Cookies and Web Beacons. Can you explain exactly which information collected by Pokémon GO is necessary for the provision or improvement of services? Are there any other purposes for which Pokémon GO collects all of this information?

2.  According to reports, Pokémon GO also requests permission to access a number of mobile capabilities, including but not limited to the ability to control vibration on a phone, prevent the phone from sleeping, and find contact accounts on the device. Can you explain exactly which features and capabilities are necessary for Pokémon GO to access for the provision or improvement of services? Are there any other purposes for which Pokémon GO has access to all of these features and capabilities?

3. If, in fact, some of the information collected and/or permissions requested by Pokémon GO are unnecessary for the provision of services, would Niantic consider making this collection/access opt-in, as opposed to requiring a user to opt-out of the collection/access?

4. Pokémon GO has stated that users’ information can be shared with The Pokémon Company and “third party service providers”. Can you provide a list of current service providers? Does Pokémon GO also share users’ information with investors in Pokémon GO?

5. Pokémon GO has further indicated that it shares de-identified and aggregate data with other third parties for a multitude of purposes. Can you more exhaustively describe the purposes for which Pokémon GO would share or sell such data? 

6. Can you describe how Niantic ensures parents provide meaningful consent for their child’s use of Pokémon GO and thus the collection of their child’s personal information? Apart from publicly available privacy policies, how does Niantic inform parents about how their child’s information is collected and used? 

7. According to reports, signing into Pokémon GO on iOS through a user’s Google account gives Niantic full access to an individual’s Google account without the user’s knowledge. Niantic has since recognized that it erroneously asked for more permissions than it intended. Can you provide an update on any fix Niantic is seeking to correct this mistake? Also, please confirm that Niantic never collected or stored any information it gained access to as a result of this mistake.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this important matter, and please do not hesitate to contact me.