don't use

to reach of the satellite network. right now these things have two orders, 100 times other resolutions and satellites and they are under the class they are free. the data is free in the dispatch will be anywhere, anytime access to the satellites are getting better. the optics are getting better, getting cheaper. >> you get persistent coverage now with these type algae. >> one thing i want to answer his question about these the. hitting social networks interest in flying to his phenomenal. it helps all of us. just like robotics office of innovation and got everyone excited at home everybody. i think ambitious projects like

that are fascinating. you know, challenging, absolutely. i think a lot of those stories have their, specifically on that knowledge he. i don't think none of it has tested early. bitterly sneered as bait. i think that is huge. going back to the chris said and these guys eating satellite companies lunch, i think that's going to happen. it's becoming easier and easier flying under the class. it's just going to have to. >> next question. the macs of whether analyzing the field of agriculture for photography, what interaction do you see these drones come with nature, for instance labor, land date on the drone are colliding with it. tell us about your experience is the fact that are probably interesting. >> i actually wrote an article that talked about my 15 friends the last phantoms a month after

he flew over water. there are interactions in many protected areas of overflights actions. you're not supposed to fly over them anyways. i have flown over a lot of wildlife in a fight for the most part these things are completely bored. they don't know what they are. if it's a big animal, they are small. if you fly over something like a whale, which i have not done because a lot of people would be listening to this. there's a lot of rules against these things. in so, bird strikes are a fat during this goes back to safety. if you can design these things so they are resistant to be struck by some to, accidents can absolutely have the. >> the copter is not a problem, that the airplane are perceived

as intrusions into the territorial space. so hawks often attack planes. i can tell you the hawks in. >> bees, dragonflies to investigate these things and usually fly away from these he. some elements that don't be afraid because they sound like bees. you have to look at each animal and the how it might respond. is mostly looking out for you fly to determine whether you should fly there. that's the most import they. >> you know, one interesting they related to birds come away to become me asking when we're basically saying we were about data in multiple companies came to us asking for different use cases, which makes me believe this is going to be massive space. this company basically wanted to irs to dissuade birds away from

these, what do you call it, turbine. the contract in the deal was attractive enough for us to say let's try it out. we did a test and it's extremely challenging. you try to keep birds away from these turbine. you know, birds get used to you. you know, they get scared first, they get used to you. they go right past it. it's sort of essay put more of these things in the air, i think yours will be used to these things flying around. >> one last story. california, yours interests pcs have been attract at north by ranches and carcasses, et cetera. their territories in baja. the san diego zoo and others in

charge of helping want to encourage them to move to that. what they do is they dropped these cattle carcasses on this breadcrumb trail down south. hadi telecom are interested to count 10 miles away. it turns out the birds look for the circling columns of other bird. you don't have a lot of time. you want to get a circle of birds going. have you catalyze? me and so a drone. you circle over a dead cow from a distance that looks like another bird of prey. a condors are like low food and you keep doing and every time i'll all the way down to baja. >> wow, that was a good question. [applause] next question, please. >> over here. way over here. you know, we have been talking a lot about drones as flying

objects in terms of pound, two pounds, 20 pounds. as you said, they could become like us. so i am one to read how you are interacting with your client and thinking about a drone in your centerpiece tonight and talk about our conversation. while privacy you mention, i don't think that's really the case. how are you thinking about the evolution of trade three in terms of embedded sensors and everyday experience because humans do not have the capacity to send it there safe and there. >> wow, do you have a smartphone? as i've been reporting it this whole time. the sensors are already here. it may be more obvious right now

because you have to take this out in ua. we are going to have to catch up to the phone at some point maybe. these are of course getting more interesting all the time. we've only got in one direction historically. i don't know if that can sustain itself forever. >> i think answer your question about drones, people are building trade three of the boat to fly around and actually navigate on a completely autonomous. i think you'll see a lot of innovation the offline things are fine things get centers h., the most should. there's innovation and robotics everywhere. these big trucks are now completely fully autonomous. so industries as a whole are looking for automation. when it comes to safety, remove the human print very dangerous places in robots instead. so that is going eon just

finding things. >> it's got to be a privacy discussion fundamentally. if you talk about militarizing things that can move in space and record. we have to think about privacy is a fundamental issue and no matter what tool you used to violate someone's privacy, you have still violated the privacy. i would like to get the discussion away from trent three and get these two moving sensors that make policy around the entire class. >> rate, next question. >> this question is respond to jonathan's statement about hardware becoming free. in the course of technology in recent years the software has come free and probably every disservice i enroll in his with free software. you >> are so concerned about the mentality works at the base is model works around the top.

>> certainly a lot of web-based software begins and a lot of people especially large enterprises are paid for a lot of that software. i know they personally pay for software. >> was so this is difficult. use multiple drones are driving significant value. but there's significant value at stake here. >> i think is the drone with history as having a lot of corollaries until the computer industry and its the case that people build a lot of hirer and you really bought this where there's little software

available. the personal computer where they are buying hardware and emergent to things like operating systems, which we saw at dawson and has become the platform of choice for a number of decades and then software built-in to the web and we begin to see eventually a model is more around av software is free but data that was paid for and so i would be surprised at all if we see a similar progression in where a lot of the value is in the space as well. >> i agree. so our model is to give away the bid and sell the items. we acted to make money by extent sheeting the hardware and software and other people saw that but i think i agree. ultimately the data is where the value lies in the services

around the data. >> a lot of services are free. the product review. he paid a different currency. the data support a modest virus free. the other thing about the hardware becoming for users consumables and so i think all the other stuff may be free, the batteries have to replace and they are not going to be free. >> next question you >> hi, eric, you mentioned a few times a drone is just a tool. i am curious about specifically in the world of art cinematography whether it be a scorsese film, espn, the next blue planet, what is it the cinematographer will be able to do that they ever been able to do in the past, ignoring legality. >> the great thing about

creative it's really up to the people out there with the tools and it's whatever they can do. we really think about these cameras you can arbitrarily position. and so, it is mostly the low altitude stuff. anything close to the ground that's beyond reach is new territory. what we see now is a mad rush for people to collect much of the footage is possible because it is all new. the first video had go viral was just the video i know i'm out for a morning for finding no one had you not. no one had filmed surfers from 15 feet up before entraps them as if they are going by waves. it's not a particularly great video, but it captured the imagination of a lot of these people. cameras that can stay at one place how very very precisely at low altitude to create these new

opportunities. this significant challenges like these things speak noise. they are paid. they have the possibility of crashing. you don't want to damage the fragile environment for people. if you go -- if you do a youtube search two videos, you'll find every altitude industry imaginable and some of it is incredibly creative and a lot of it is actually people having fun in the backyard. install spector. >> you look at the rise of goat probing, one of the things it is amazing for camera people with this kind of disposable. when will drones be considered disposable in that context? >> we are sort of already there. this cost less and you have to let it go pro to it. they don't cost very much. i think of that as tools that

are essentially disposable. if you are working in industry come you party spent a lot of your money and time on gear, travel, all of these things that these are relatively next that compare to other costs. the thing i worried about being disposable as literary. you don't want to really consider them disposable. if you could sub national parks to see beautiful arch, you will find them all over because everyone's trying to fight through it. you want to think about these things as batteries can catch fire. there's potential for bad things to happen. >> one of the things we were with his actual disposable tray in tree with the phone was made of biodegradable corn-based foam and they sent 100 out and they do not come back. the data comes back. a severe take measuring the

temperature at what happens is when they don't have to come back, it doubles the range and they landed water, a very small number of metal-based safe to the god of. the batteries are a side issue. we have to resolve that. >> one last thought on kind of the creative elements. this is the quote nature videography. we have in our pockets most extraordinary care medicine software based on youtube and go pro that we go pro that we tell our own stories, recorder of lines and this is just one more of those tools. if you watch espn or the nfl game, there's these cameras are liars and you get these shots. why should your kids soccer game be recorded with the same fidelity? feedback we have time for one more question. >> regarding the application of

drone for the urban area and especially looking to add, have you can figure the problem of the air traffic, also the air traffic control was going to be a private beach of fee. >> we are working with nasa to explore some option is building out what is considered a low altitude air traffic management system specifically for very small uavs for this kind of futuristic application of something like aerial delivery. i think some of the key elements of that of course is internet conic tv with the drones themselves that they are really in real-time record hated the way the robots and implementation are all communicating their location so

what looks like a near miss between two robots is a well orchestrated system, even if one of them had lost communications. we will see some similar belts out for small uavs eventually. >> there is a standard that is actually transponder or aircraft scary that they would air traffic troll. but it doesn't have to be a physical device. there'll be a signal by which the aircraft position and is broadcast by network the faa may run. we're actually argued clemente. our vehicles can argue apart the position. >> just think >> just think we have cars with registration tracked by cameras in every corner in police and everything. i believe in the early days i was working on this thing called

eyre highway and we basically took the initiative to talk to the city first and figure out how they benefit from these things flying around. we basically focus on how the city benefit from registration, from toll payment, basically tracking every single move so that the city is also benefit from the same slide around and we basically layer on top of that with the technology would be to lay out this sort of very ambitious project, sort of 15 years from now. that's why it never today. >> back to kerry. >> i just want to say thank you tour speakers so much for being so sharing with our% is. really appreciate it. [applause]

and also to rabin for your guidance pre-and during program, getting this conversation. you did a wonderful job. [applause] we have a small gift for you. it is the speaker t-shirt at the churchill club. please wear that in good health. video of this program should be available by tomorrow or the next day on our youtube channel, which is youtube.com/bookclub. you've been a wonderful group. thank you so much. hope to see you next week. goodnight. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> so i tell the story about my commas every aspect of whose identity is in one way or another a threat to israel. by gender is male. a religion is muzzled. my citizenship is american, but my nationality is a radiant trade my ethnicity is persian, cultures middle eastern. everything about sendoff all the warning signals for israel.

and so the experience of an arabian american single man tried to get through ben-gurion airport in the 21st century is a reminder to everyone that despite the late globalization has brought us closer and has diminished the boundaries that separate us as a nation, as it is cities, s. people and cultures, despite all of that, all you've got to do is spend a few minutes trying to get through ben-gurion airport to remember that as division, those things that separate us are still very much alive.

>> this past monday, victim monday, victims compensation adviser and attorney kenneth feinberg cannot compensation plan for the family of people killed or injured in car related to follow the ignition switches and she had vehicles. he previously advised families affected by september 11 attacks, the virginia tech shooting the bus thereupon bombing. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. thank you all for coming this morning. my name is kenneth feinberg and i've been assigned the task of designing and ministering the gm

admission compensation claims resolution protocol, the gm in distance with untruths which compensation program. i want to spend a few minutes this morning with an overview of the program, how we got where we are. second way, i want to summarize the eligibility criteria for claiming who can file a claim. in third, i want to explain about the dollars and the compensation available under the program. we started drafting this protocol about two months ago. initially it gm's request, we have reached out to a wide variety of individuals and the two should to get as much information as we could about what i could be on this program. i think general motors for the

total cooperation in establishing this program. they are fun in it. and they are fun event without any cat on the aggregate amount of money that's going to be available. gm basically has said whatever it costs to pay all eligible claim under the protocol, they will pay it. there is no ceiling on the aggregate dollars. also, gm has said under this program anybody who already settled their claim with general motors before they knew about this cover up for this nations which program they rip up the release they sign a comeback into this program to get additional compensation. so i have read the errors of individuals who already settled and give up their right to sue

in return for compensation. they may now ignore that release coming to this program. and receive additional compensation. the program will begin to receive claims on august 1st at this year, a month from now. and i want to thank the deputy at the straighter, my colleague for over 35 years, camilla by rose, who is right here in the front row. cabell has worked with me on every single one of these programs over the years since she will be here after the press conference to have traditional question that individual media may have. the program will commence on august 1. it will begin to receive claims between now and august 1 we will have the claim for, the frequently asked questions, the

website. we translated the claim forms to french-canadian and spanish. it will be august 1 when we begin to accept claims. all claims must be postmarked no later than december 31st, the end of this year. for accidents that occurred anytime up to december 31st, the gm bankruptcy is no bar to finally a claim under this program. it is no bar. if an individual is injured or killed unfortunately one of these accidents before or after the date earthsea, it doesn't under the date of the accident. the bankruptcy will not be a barrier of any type to the filing of a claim. now we'll obviously have to stick around in 22015 because

people will file claims, some of them waited to hear and we will need time to process the claims during 2015. but if you file a claim that the funds come a few points should be made about the overall program. first, the program is in tiredly voluntary. nobody is required to file a claim. this is a voluntary program. sakic, once your claim is submitted and we deem that substantially complete, that if it has documents necessary, we will process that claim. .. we'll process that claim within 180 days from the time it is substantially complete.

we will work as fast as we can to get compensation, voluntarily-submitted claims, out the door to eligible claimants. a few other points about the ram. about the program. any contributory negligence of the driver -- intoxication, speeding, texting on a cell phone, etc. -- irrelevant under this program. texting on a cell phone at sab sabra, irrelevant under this program, irrelevant. contributory -- this program is about general motors and ignition switches. we have no interest in evaluating any alleged contributory negligence on the part of the driver. it's totally irrelevant. we have no interest.

this program is aimed at compensation for defective switches, not anything about the driver. who is eligible under this program? let's discuss eligibility. the following individuals can file under this program. the driver, any passengers in the automobile, and a pedestri pedestrian, any occupant of a second vehicle involved in the accident, all eligible to file a claim. we are not limiting this program to just drivers of a particular vehicle. and as i said contributory negligence not a factor here at all. now, eligibility. there are a couple of

prerequisites to filing a claim. first, as the protocol spells out on pages two and three, for a claim to be eligible, it must involve one of the motto, make and year automobile listed in the protocol. if the automobile that was driven and was involved in an accident is not listed in the protocol that you have, the claim is ineligible. don't bother filing it. i am confident i will get many claims involving automobiles that aren't listed. i will get claims ignition experience, mercedes, jaguars, cadillacs. build it and they will come. you will get a great many claims about the only automobiles that

are eligible to be considered are the automobiles listed in this protocol and if that automobile, that model, that year isn't automobile involved in an accident that automobile is eligible to be considered for compensation. if the airbag deployed in the accident, airbag deployment, seatbelts deployment means the power is on the automobile, ineligible. it couldn't have been the ignition switch. now i haven't seen a claim yet eligible in trying to work my way through potential claims. i have seen many claims where the airbag did not deploy or we don't know whether the airbag deployed. fine, eligible. if we know the airbag deployed,

the power is on, there may have been a horrible accident but it's not the ignition switch so it must be an eligible vehicle was nonairbag deployment or uncertainty as to whether the airbag deployed in those aren't the major eligibility prerequisites to filing a claim. but again, nondeployment eligible vehicle driver, passengers, pedestrians occupants of the vehicles filed a claim claim. we will evaluate the claim and the length value eight it quickly. individuals who have suffered terribly in this whole experience deserve prompt treatment of their claim and we will do that. any individual claimant who lost a loved one or an individual claimant who suffered a catastrophic injury defined in

the protocol, i will be glad to meet them privately, confidentially and chat with them privately about any item or anything they would like to talk about. honored to do so, glad to do so. now, if you file a claim, the test for eligibility will be, was the ignition switch defect a proximate cause of the accident? that's right in the protocol. that's right out of the first year of law school. it was the ignition switch defect in an eligible vehicle with the airplay -- where the airbag did not deploy a proximate cause also known as a substantial cause of the accident? now here's the challenge.

here is the challenge. unlike the 9/11 fund or the bp oil spill fund, many of these accidents occurred years ago, a decade ago. what evidence, what circumstantial evidence can be produced that will demonstrate and ignition switch failure as the cause of the accident? well, we have done quite a bit of homework on this and there are six, seven, eight different examples of very valuable evidence that will help demonstrate a link between ignition switch failure and the accident area rate here they are. one, the car.

now it's very useful obviously if the automobile is still available. unfortunately some of these automobiles the accident took place so long ago the automobile is michael blount anymore but if the automobile is available that's the best evidence. of course we will look at the automobile and the lawyers and claimants can show that was the ignition switch that's wonderful information. but the automobile and many of these cases, maybe most of the cases, won't be available. second, do we have the edr blackbox data from the car? very very useful. that edr blackbox data that's in the automobile, if the data is available, if it's captured at the time of the accident by the police, by the insurance company, by the claimant's lawyers, by hugh weber, that edr data goes a long way in demonstrating the ignition

switch failure. so even if you don't have the car, do you have a blackbox data? very helpful. three, what does the police reports say at the time of the accident? some of these police reports are extremely valuable as circumstantial evidence that an airbag didn't deploy, contemporary witness statements about the steering wheel locking or the antilock brakes not working, witnesses that were interviewed at the time by the police reflected in the police report, very helpful bit of information. four, the photographs of the accident. we have already learned that photographs of the accident are enormously helpful to us in demonstrating ignition switch failure based on the impact, the way the car was hit, what it

hits, very useful. contemporary photographs of the accident scene very useful. next, the insurance company. what does the insurance companies say in its file about that accident? what is in the insurance files that insurance companies can be rather thorough in their examination of accident and their own expertise. what does the insurance files show? what does the medical record show from a hospital, not just about the condition of the innocent victim but what did the witnesses tell the doctors and the hospitals and the emergency room about what happened? my car suddenly lost power. my steering wheel locks. my brakes didn't work. what do the hospital records tell us not only about the injury but about the cause of the injury. very useful. next, warranty and maintenance

records. we have found that some people, weeks, months before the accident took their automobile to the dealer or to an independent dealer complaining, my car was stalling. when my key hits the ignition switch it fails. my car stalls. i'm having trouble steering. i'm having trouble with the brakes, the antilock brakes. we would like to see as part of the submission of a claim any warranty or maintenance records that would help us in this matter. then, there are some claimants, some individuals who filed lawsuits that are pending where there were pretrial depositions taken, where there were written in toronto tory spelled out, where we had experts out of reconstruction expert filing

reports. we would like to see those depositions and that information. all of these examples, and there may be others, there may be others. i mean we have talked to gm. we have talked to the plaintiff lawyers. elizabeth cabrasa tom above hillyer, lance cooper other plaintiff lawyers. we have talked to the center for automotive safety, john claybrook, clarence. these are people we have been talking with over the past few months to try and get a better understanding on the key issue, who is eligible to even file a claim? before you get to compensation enough to be eligible and this is all part of the eligibility determination. now you will see in the protocol that if a claimant files a claim and the claim is deficient, we

will not deny that claim. we will work with the claimant to try and help the claimant get other information that will cure the deficiency and make the claim eligible. so, that is sort of a summary discussed in the first few pages of the protocol. that is sort of a summary of the eligibility requirements and we will work with claimants in an effort to find claims eligible in meeting the proximate cause standard that the ignition switch caused the accident. it is a real challenge because the age of the claims but we will work with claimants and their lawyers. it would be very helpful here in trying to do the right thing. compensation.

there are three, in the protocol, i will summarize. there are three categories of compensation. one, we will compensate eligible death claims, unfortunate innocent victims who died. remember contributory negligence not a factor. we are not even looking at it. we will compensate individual victims of the accident who are eligible. second, a second category, special second category. we will compensate eligible catastrophic injuries defined in the protocol. quadriplegics, paraplegics, permanent brain injuries requiring continuous care, double amputees, pervasive burn

victims with burns over their entire body. these are the types of catastrophic injuries that are a special category as defined in the protocol. the third category of compensation, less serious, more moderate physical injuries requiring either hospitalization within 48 hours of the accident or for those moderate injuries where the victim of the accident did not even go to the hospital or didn't stay overnight. outpatient medical treatment within 48 hours of the accident. that is a third category of compensation. now the two priority categories for this program, clearly a

priority. the individual death claims in the catastrophic injury claims. these are the individuals and their families most in need who we want to try and get the compensationu with the 90 or 180 days, as fast as we can. just as with the 9/11 victim compensation fund, which is really the precedent we used in coming up with the compensation model, every single individual filing a death claim or a catastrophic injury claim may choose one of two paths to compensation in the protocol. track a, all we need under track a a is the age of the victim, how much she aired he was earning at the time of the death or catastrophic injury or if he

or she was going to school. we go to the bureau of labor statistics and come up with a number annual wage number as if they were working from the age of 25 so if someone died who was five, 10 or 17 going to school we have the formula included in this program. and whether or not they had any dependence. that's all we need to know to track. that's all we need to know. now we can meet privately with individual family members if they want to talk about other things that's fine. that is fine, welcomed that under track a, if somebody will just provide us the age of the victim, how much that victims earning at the time of the accident and whether they have any dependents that's all we need to calculate a track a award based on national statistics about what that person earned over a lifetime.

the claimant doesn't have to file track a. it's up to the claimant but at the claimant wants a quick, prompt processing of his or her claim under track a for death or catastrophic injury, they can do so. we will add to that claim in addition to whatever economic loss is calculated by the bureau of labor statistics. we will add $1 million in pain and suffering under track a for the victim and in addition to 300,000 for any surviving spouse or dependent. that will be added to the calculation. that's the death claims. examples. now these are presumptive examples without regard to any individual claimant that i want

to give you some idea of the scope of the compensation under track a for death or catastrophic injury. a 17-year-old driver, single, unemployed going to school, living at home, no dependents, $2.2 million, track a. $2.2 million, economic and noneconomic loss. a 25-year-old married, two children, earning $46,400 a ye year, $4 million under track a. a 25-year-old employed earning $75,000 a year, married, two children who died, $5.1 million.

examples under track a. any individual family member who doesn't want to use track a, wants to come in under track v and explained in their claim form other extraordinary circumstances that should be brought to my attention, those numbers don't apply. we will look at the individual claim, submit it under track v, see what other extraordinary circumstances exist in that claim, just like we did in 9/11 and these numbers will not apply. we will be considering track v. catastrophic or track a. two examples, if you go track a for catastrophic injury. this is two examples. a 10-year-old individual, young person no earnings of course,

paraplegic, track a $7.8 million. if you go track a. a 40-year-old paraplegic earning $70,000 a year, married, no children, paraplegic, $6.6 million out of the fund. again, the reason i can just project these numbers is it's based simply on national averaging. it is just like 9/11. it's the bureau of labor statistics providing us the data. any individual family member or victim who doesn't like this track a presumptive model and would rather have a tailored track v consideration of

extraordinary circumstances, glad to do it. in 9/11 we had a series of track v extraordinary circumstance cases. mr. feinberg my daughter was going to be married next week. she was her only daughter and she died at the world trade center. we recognize that as track b. mr. feinberg we lost both of our children in the world trade center or onto airplanes. we recognize that is track b. mr. feinberg, in the general motors matter, i represent a client who 10 years ago was driving when her boyfriend was killed and for 10 years she thought she was the reckless driver.

it destroyed her life. we want to go track b, of course, of course track b. we will work with individual family members to try and develop track a or track b for death or physical injury. catastrophic physical injury. then there is the third catego category, less serious, physical injury. all we want to know under this fund under less serious physical injury, we do not want to be flooded with less serious physical injuries and medical records and doctors reports so the product call -- protocol builds on the virginia tech fun that we established and the

boston marathon found that we establish. we just ask a couple of questions. one, assuming you are eligible, how long were you in the hospital? hospitalization is a pretty good circuit for serious injury. how long? overnight observation? $20,000. over a month, $500,000. in between, a sliding scale. mr. feinberg i went to the emergency room and then i went home. now are originally we weren't planning on including that as eligible. we got such pushback from so many people plaintiff lawyers, center for auto safety, others,

the protocol does permit eligibility for outpatient medical treatment $20,000, cap to add $20,000. now, on these less serious injuries, there is a prerequisite. all we want is the claim form filled out with a simple letter from a the hospital or your doctor confirming medical treatments, hospitalization within 48 hours of the accident. why not a weak? why not this month as some have suggested? the priority here of the death from catastrophic injury claims, these less serious physical injury claims, we want some contemporary documentation that people received immediate treatment. so it's 48 hours.

now if you received outpatient medical treatment within 48 hours in three weeks later you went into the hospital, that's fine as long as there's an initial hospitalization or medical treatment within 48 hours and then the sliding scale of the protocol kicks in. a flat amount, no population's. those are the amounts that will be made. i will agree, as i did with 9/11, as we did with the boston marathon, as we did with virginia tech, as we did with there were a colorado in a town in connecticut, i will meet privately with any family member or their lawyer privately who wants to chat with me about their claim, about their lost loved one, about their needs, about life's unfairness, whatever they would like to chat about my door is open. i will meet with them.

it is easily without a doubt the most difficult part of this assignment, meeting privately with family members. it is very stressful, but it's essential because there are family members who want to have their voice heard and i and the fellow that is the administrator i'm willing to meet with them and chat with them about anything they want to tell me. this program is designed to help claimants. this program is not designed to punish general motors. if people want punitive damages, if they want to use litigation to go after general motors, then i'll entirely they should not submit a claim to me because if you submit a claim to this program and we award a certain amount of money, you have to

eventually sign a release that you will not sue general motors. don't sign the release if you want to seek satisfaction or you want to sue general motors, but remember the program is voluntary and you don't have to decide whether or not you want to participate in this program until we offer a resolution. here is what we are prepared to pay, you are eligible, here's the amount, track a or track b or hospitalization or outpatient medical treatment. only then if you are satisfied with the program will you participate and signed a release and there will be many family members who will want to see me personally before they agree whether or not they want to sign

that release and i welcome those meetings. i welcome those meetings. that's the program. now, two final points and then questions. the 9/11 fund, 97% of all the eligible families that lost a loved one came into the fund. 97%, $7.1 billion, taxpayer money to 9/11 fund. bp, 92% of all eligible claimants came into the fund. these are tough statistics to match with this program. boston 100%. virginia tech, 100%. newtown connecticut, 100%. these are tough statistics to match. we will work with the lawyers,

with the families to try and do this. i must say in a way it's a pretty poor substitute. i say this all the time in these programs. money is a pretty poor substitute for loss. you can get people 20, 30, 50 million. it's pretty poor substitute. as the limits of all we can do unfortunately. we can't bring people back. we can't destroy lives. it's the best we can do. hopefully a program all work. the only test, how many people participate. this summary all the words in the world don't matter at the end of the day. the only thing that matters at the end of the day, how quickly did you get money out the door

to eligible claimants? that's the only test so when people say to me well it sounds this way or that way i have heard from some lawyers, we will see. it sounds maybe like this can work. we will see. i agree with that, we will see. but we are ready to start the process. august 1 we will be ready and i'm ready to take questions from you. yes sir. [inaudible] >> do you have any sense of how many victims -- general motors keep saying 13. do you have any sense if it's 30 or over 100? >> i will not speculate about this. i've been asked over and over again even before announcing how many deaths, how many serious injuries? what were the cost to the program? i haven't had any idea. it would be pure speculation at this time. people have to file their claims. we have got to look and see what

they are submitting. we will do as best as we can but i will not speculate on that. >> one quick follow-up, have you talked with many victims families in putting this program together? >> now. i have talked to many of the lawyers representing victims families families. i've not impose myself. i didn't think it was appropriate. families grieve in private. it's not my place. if victims families as a result of this conference today want to meet with me on the phone or in person, wonderful. i'm glad to do it. can you just tell me when you ask a question who you represent. >> popular low with cnn. to build on those question we have on those questioned the apprentice number 13 deaths over and over from general motors. they have a college that may rise once you go to the claims. a key question about all this is we have talked to the victims families families. well that death be counted that occurred in the backseat of a car?

>> yes, absolutely. >> even if they died as a result of an airbag that fail to have failed? >> it doesn't matter. irrelevant. if it's an eligible vehicle, the airbag did not deploy with the driver, driver, passenger, pedestrian occupant of another vehicle where the airbag might have deployed doesn't matter to. >> side-impact crashes? >> eligible. yes maam. from reuters. >> juliette from reuters. thank you mr. feinberg. some of these families have said they want to go to seek punitive damages against the m. -- gm because they feel that will bring gm further to justice for covering lingering this problem for so long. why should they take your offer rather than suing? >> they shouldn't. if an individual family member wants to seek to bring general

notice to justice in their mind by seeking punitive damages they should not come into this program. they should sue. now i would say this about litigating against general motors. it's one thing if somebody wants to litigate to get additional monetary punishment from general motors. .. only way we can find out what really happened. i'd be careful about that argument. there are other, more efficient available mechanisms and avenues to pursue to find out the facts about what really happened. the congress is very interested in finding out what really happened. i read in the newspaper the u.s. attorneys and the department of justice are very interested in

finding out what really happened. there are other avenues to pursue to do that. if it's the money that drives the punitive damage avenue, then this program is not for you. but if >> for this program is not for you but if compensatory damage, hopefully very generous of what you seek. and he will accuse other avenues to find out what really happened. that to me is the optimum way to go. yes sir. affiliation? >> just to be clear on something is the money that you pay in addition to actual expenses that person might have incurred or is it defined to be total? we are calculating image on a

blank slate and paying the total rewards to the claimant we are not factoring in the other costs we are paying a lump sum payme payment. that is an interesting question. if what you have already spent its litigation or expert investigative reports, yes. look at the very last paragraph of the protocol. we will work with the claimant to make sure the claimant gets a lump sum payment and we will work with them on the expense problem which is implicit in the question. your name please.

>> i've got birthmother of amber marie rose and i have another family with me here today. i personally found 165 deaths. i have this information in my hand. would you like it? >> i would indeed. i would like not only that information, but i would be glad to meet with you and your family members privately and i would like to know anything that you have or anything you think would be helpful in this program guide would love to sit and chat with you at your convenience to learn more about what you think and how this program could be made in the most effective way to. >> i welcome that. as far as the deployment we have evidence in a few cases it looks like the driver actually managed to get the vehicle on a second or two before impact, thus the air bag deployed. would you consider those?

>> let's see what you have to offer and i would be glad to consider anything you have. i haven't heard about this. if you have some relatively rare example like that, we would like to hear what you have to say, absolutely. >> thank you. appreciate that's. >> anybodthat. >> anybody else? anybody have another question that? on the particles in the vehicles can you explain why it only applies to vehicles that have the parts replaced? >> gm tells me you should direct it to general motors, it's not just the ignition switch problem. it's the whole context in which the recall occurred on the 2.6 million vehicles, this inability disclosing it, the fact that gm should have disclosed the information in the lucas report that the gm tells

us this is a unique problem that arose. the context in which the failure gm decided this is the limitation of the authority that i have under this program. >> will you make a public accounting of your findings on aggregate basis and how many claims approved or not. i will at the end of the program as we always do have an audit and executive summary how many claims and how many were eligible and how many were in eligible etc.. we have to be very, very careful that we do not disclose any time a confidential submissions of individual families that of a file or how much money they

received they found out in all of these programs 9/11 and other programs that in order to maximize participation, confidentiality is critical and that many people don't want that information disclosed but we will come up with as you say some summary information that will be useful. let me say one other thing that i neglected to say. at the tip of the hat to the center for auto safety. joan claybrook. the number one issue with us was noticed. how do you reach people and tell them about the program. how do you know that people around the country in elsewhere and canada will know about this program. we are notifying by letter 2.6 million people who have a subject of the recall.

we are notifying by letter hundreds and hundreds of people who have already notified the gm that they think that if they werthey wereinvolved in an injuh claim involving the ignition switch. we will send a letter to then. we also asked the center for auto safety's personal urging we will notify all former owners of the vehicles so that the former owners who sold their vehicle or traded it in or whatever were subject to the death or physical injury they could finally claim. it is going to be as about as expensive as a notice program as we can come up with it. this was a big issue with ms. claybrook and we planned to have this expensive unnoticed program this is limited to

physical injury and death. i rea read in the newspaper thee are all sorts of lawsuits pending in both and damaged automobiles that has nothing to do with this program. that is often th often decide wt in any way involved with any economic property damage claims this was in depth claims. >> when calculating the money that would go to the victims i know that you are looking at the labor statistics when you're starting with a baseline of 1 million or the hospital stays who came up with those numbers flex did gm give you those

numbers and will the families be told to keep silent if they do sign in to take the claim? >> and entirely up to them. if the families decide that they want to call a press conference in taking this money is entirely up to the families. i wouldn't begin to impose any other conditions on families. i've learned over the years that's none of my business and they can do whatever they want. that is not my business. either we get the numbers -- these are not gm numbers. these are numbers that our team of economists and modelers, economics, we came up with these numbers. economic -- $1 million for a death claim presumptive it may be more under the track but where did that come from? i'll come in 9/11 which was a long time ago, that number was $250,000 as an average settlement member for the law

and economics law. that number today is $750,000 average. we decided the number should be higher and we went to $1 million. the layer in the joint and in texas and other lawyers as well and her colleagues all said if you are going to -- we don't have to take it but presumptively it ought to be more than that. the 300,000 is much more than 9/11 as the average also. now you also asked -- the second question about the silent for the condition, no such condition imposed on families at all. yes ma'am. >> poppy harlow with cnn again. looking at what you've done in the past with the orioles bill

and 9/11, they are different in that it was very clear who died as a result of the deepwater horizon explosion or who died as a result of 9/11. here, can you talk to us about the process? are these victims and their families and their attorneys basically going to be holding court in front of you as the sole arbiter to decideupon and also you talk about having to be an expeditious getting that money out at the same time in some of these cases there is a lot to go through. how do you make a determination of the approximate cause was the ignition switch and also in a timeframe that you would like? >> it's very difficult. the challenge. but don't be misled into thinking that we didn't have the same problems in 9/11 and bp. we did. and 9/11, you will recall the statute creating the program said that physical injuries had two of her in the, quote, immediate vicinity of the world trade center or the pentagon.

and that's medical treatment had to be immediately thereafter. we ran into a storm of problems with first responders delay in their medical treatment >> [inaudible] you're right it was much easier than 9/11. and ep we have a huge problem with whether or not the economic damage was caused by the orioles bill. this is a challenge. the main problem we are going to have here and we will work on the protocol to cure the deficiencies is that so many of these accidents occurred long ago and we have to come up with circumstantial evidence that satisfies the proximate cause. now, all of the many ways you've done that but you are right, speed is still going to be challenged here why people collect information.

i once more on the interaction with gm. you came up with a claim. there is no methodology coming up to it but would you send in the claim and say pay at? >> read the question and the protocol that gives the claim in and gm the opportunity to be heard. we notified the gm over the basic nature of the claims this week. if there's any information that would be helpful in making our decision, fine.

from either side providing the information as long as i'm not exchanging anything confidential and will give either side the opportunity to be heard. but here is the key in this article. once we make a decision on the eligible dollars protocol gives final discretion to do that. gm may not challenge it in court or reject and they may say we think we made a mistake. that's fine. they have to honor it. and they have to pay the claim and they cannot refuse under the protocol to pay any final determination that we make on the ground but it's a mistake. that's the end of it.

yes, sir numbers of the congress investigating have taken an interest in making compensation funds. funds. did he meet with them in developing this or did you brief any of them on the matter? >> i briefed the most visible members of congress senator blumenthal of connecticut. extraordinarily helpful. i met him personally with his staff. he had written a letter to the justice department urging of the invasion. i met with him. they expressed certain views about helping the claimants and some suggestions he hoped i would follow-up on, which i have, and i welcome any input. i would be glad to meet with them as well.

>> quick question on your interaction with general motors. how often did you talk with her in setting this up. can you characterize the nature of the conversations? >> almost all of my conversations involved other people at general motors. absolutely, 100% cooperative. we want to do the right thing. general motors is a great company and we want to do right. general motors has been extremely helpful. i found it important not to limit or input from general motors. i went to various plaintiff lawyers around the country and asked them what they thought about some of the features of this protocol. and of course the center for the auto safety here in washington. i must say general motors at no time to -- they don't agree with

everything in the protocol. they signed onto it and you will have to ask them what they like and don't like about it but they signed up and approved them paying the freight on this. healthy debate, very open, transparent discussion and i gave general motors a lot of credit for participating in the program. no cap on the aggregate amount of money. that is so important. i found when there is a cap and inevitably the claimants would say you're giving me less because you have to pay more to save somebody else. it's human nature. with no aggregate cap i could tell every claimant you don't have to worry about what someone else is getting. there is no cap on the program and you will get whatever you are entitled to. again, that is general motors agreeing there is no contributory negligence. general motors, we open an old settled claim allowing people to

come into the program. general motors using the bankruptcy bar to undercut what would otherwise be meritorious claims. i can't speak to the history of the program but i can certainly speak to the last three months and i must say the colleagues at general motors absolutely 100% cooperative. >> a quick follow-up. is there data you provided does that mean if the airbag didn't deflate if someone were wearing their seatbelts they would be in eligible? >> it is in and order. all i have seen so far is notwithstanding the exception the airbag doesn't deploy seatbelts don't work either. that is an engineering issue that i would have to see. i don't think that it is likely doesn't deploy the seatbelts

were not. yes, sir. >> would there be some structured settlements? >> that is up to the individual claimant and the lawyers and accountants and advisers that is to require any conditions how any individual claimants want to receive this money that is entirely up to them and their advisor would do whatever they want. you consulted the data from the federal agency.

now granted that no amount of money is going to compensate. but the dot has a policy of $9.1 million for each, for the value of the statistical life and i would like to know did you consider that when you arrived at the protocol that i haven't readyet? >> you haven't read the protocol yet? >> i don't believe we did. our experts may have. i don't know the answer to that but i have an overall policy institute that which was very important and something that the plaintiff lawyers around the country constantly reminded me about. whenever the presumptive number might be at the individual case. they have the option under the

protocol of going to the track. in raising the overall value of the award and we will look at it. we will examine it and meet with the claimant and his or her lawyer and we will try to work that out. if the tracking was deemed by any claimant in the particular case would be insufficient. whether the number of injuries and crashes that may be linked to this? >> no. i don't think that's accurate. they just said there was a group or hundreds --

>> [inaudible] it is roughly 3500 people that may have written in to gm cleaning injury or death. absolutely no evidence yet that is even a gm car or ignition switch failure or anything like that just combining the statistics to take a look at those. >> is there any questions here? >> i have a question about the second category -- >> catastrophic? >> it looks like the clean an cn the catastrophic injuries have some sort of economic compensation associated with them. if that's the case for the lower

category if they lost an arm or an eye or couldn't go to work? >> no. if you lost an arm or ie and couldn't go to work the useless serious injuries were limited to how long you were in the hospital and that is all. if you lost an arm and you don't think you can go to work in the three months or six months. they get a thousand dollars and that's it. that's all in and that's for the hospitalization of that lost arm. >> if the injury did in certain cases prevent you from going back to work at all of the provisions. if you think it is too little to litigate the claim. >> i want to thank everybody. this is a complex program but it's easy to apply if there are

any questions about the mechanics of how you would file online by mail what is expected and where can we go to give the 1800 information, my colleague will be here and she will be able to answer the questions as well. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] ..