Verizon Also Wants Google To Pay Up
from the free-market-at-work dept
Verizon Wireless has already noted its objections to network neutrality, and now its similarly named parent is echoing comments from AT&T's CEO saying that companies like Google and Microsoft that provide Web applications should pay up to be able to access Verizon broadband subscribers. Verizon's CEO is taking a bit softer line than AT&T's (cognizant of the backlash, perhaps), calling internet companies "partners", and that they need to find "the right economic model". The right economic model seems pretty apparent: people pay Verizon for broadband service, and they access whatever sites and services they want. What's so hard about that? Verizon says it's actually in favor of codifying network neutrality rules -- but given that its idea of FCC reform was essentially to remove any and all broadband regulation, by "codify", they probably mean "enshrine the right for us to cut off people that don't pay up". Of course, they say they won't block specific applications, but if that's the case, what leverage do they have to extract money from internet companies?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
My Model is even Simpler
Can you hear ME now!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My Model is even Simpler
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free market
Of course, this is assuming that the aforementioned regulation hasn't choked off all but the largest "competitors" into a homogenized oligopoly.
Short, THIS IS A WORK OF REGULATION, not of the free market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
limited choices
Users have brought this upon themselves by not supporting independent ISP's and choosing only on price, in my opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
But you could also say its just the cost of doing business as an ISP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mind Your Own Business
Google can buy up a bunch of the dark fiber optics and start it's own broadband IP. Or if Verizon thinks they belong in the search game, then they can start their own web search services. I guess it is easier to steal someone else's money after they have developed the successful business model or product.
Do you think Verizon might have any patents that they can exploit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
And, of course, highway taxes are ostensibly for upkeep. There's no real wear and tear from people using google vs not.
It's all about greed, pure and simple. I'd love to see them try and single out google, since I think what is far more likely is we'll see business driven away from Verizon.
I have a 'net connection so I can access services like google. Take that away or try and make me pay more and I'll switch services.
The other thing that occurs to me is that if they want to do things like this, they should lose common carrier status.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Uh. What?
So please explain who isn't paying? We all pay for our bandwidth. Google pays for its bandwidth. Everyone's paying.
If Verizon undercharged, that's one issue, but they shouldn't be able to just go back and change the terms of an agreement.
Everyone's paying -- so charging Google again is CLEARLY double paying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Dear God, yet again the sheer greed of corporate Earth has outdone it's self
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LoL
Verizon can try this, however the FCC will cut off their balls. And if the FCC lets this through, Verizon's broadband subscriptions will drop like crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You are all missing the point
I would suggest the alternative is worse which is everyone paying much higher broadband access fees. In this model the expese is passed to all even if they dont use any of the other services.
It is important to note that access to a network with "best effort" throughput is not in question. The carriers are talking about guaranteed QoS which will enable a much richer experience.
And finally, many people simplify what it takes to run a broadband network to the satisfaction of the masses. Take a look at the support expenses for any major carrier and you will see there is a lot more to it than just turning it on. As we move to the IP world networks will require 99.9999% uptime in order to provide the same level of service we are accustomed to. No offense but I am not sure if many of the alternative providers will survive in this environement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmmmmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google and others also pay
Google pays MILLIONS already. So does all content providers. Telecos just want to control what you can receive at what quality so they can push their own services and content providers that will pay them extra. If this happens say goodbye to innovation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CALEA Big Brother Oh My
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]