Google, Verizon Compromise On Net Neutrality
from the gee...-who-woulda-thunk-it dept
It was just a few hours ago that we pointed to Dave Burstein's report that a net neutrality "deal" was being worked out in the backrooms -- with one part of it being a "separate peace" arranged between Verizon and Google. Well... it didn't take long, but now pretty much everyone is reporting that Google and Verizon have worked out a "compromise" deal that basically gets Verizon to promise not to discriminate access over its wired lines (something few thought it was really going to do anyway), but does not include such promises for wireless networks -- which is what Verizon really cares about looking forward anyway. Not surprisingly, the various public interest groups are not happy about this turn of events (something else accurately predicted by Burstein).Of course, it really shouldn't be a surprise that this happened -- or that the deal was between Verizon and Google (AT&T, supposedly, has been distancing itself from it). You may recall that, back in March, the CEOs of both companies co-authored a WSJ op-ed about keeping the government out of broadband. The two companies have also filed joint comments to the FCC on net neutrality. Oh, and, perhaps most importantly (from Google's standpoint), the two are working together on an Android tablet.
Of course, the real question is whether or not this agreement is good for just those two companies, or good for consumers. In many of these negotiations, Google had been playing a proxy role in fighting for consumers -- largely because in many of those fights, what was good for the consumer was, actually, good for Google. However, we've been warning for years, that as Google's interests diverge, people shouldn't rely on Google to always fight the principled fight, because its business models won't always align with consumers' principles. There's nothing wrong, of course, with supporting a company that is fighting for consumer rights when it helps to have them on your side, but people should always remember that eventually there will be a conflict between what's best for the consumer, and what's best for the business. This isn't a surprise, or anything damning Google directly -- but more a reminder for those who kept expecting Google to always fight for the consumer.
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
Filed Under: net neutrality
Companies: google, verizon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Do No Evil
Just like other back room deals made in Washington we the consumer and small businesses are going to get the shaft again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do No Evil
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do No Evil
No company is ever, truly on the consumer-side as a business philosophy. What makes Google so awesome is how they give me a worlds worth of information in seconds and is FREE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft once was good for the public and people rewarded Microsoft for it, they are no more and the public pay them in kind. Now it is Google and when they turn evil which is a matter of when and not if, people will distance themselves from it too.
The Net Neutrality fight is not about networks is about the people and what they can do to influence their own destiny, it may not turn out exactly as people imagine and rarely do, but it does one thing, it focus attention on the issues, it awake people, with that said the only way to change things is with legislation in the end either excluding some and planting some others is like gardening, you take out the weed and plant some other stuff and right now people suck at it, but give it time and more and more institutions will be created to look after the people's interest like the EFF, ACLU and others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Will Anything Make You Happy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Will Anything Make You Happy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Will Anything Make You Happy?
you mean like competition?
i happen to be a fairly strong proponent for net neutrality, but the whole thing would be a non-starter if there was increased competition in the market.
government regulation is a necessary evil. it is necessary due to the market failures that make the telco's shenanigans possible in the first place. it is evil because the government can't do anything right and pretty much always abdicates to lobbyists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Will Anything Make You Happy?
So short answer is: if there is competition Net Neutrality is not an issue. If you have one choice for internet then Net Neutrality is a big deal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Will Anything Make You Happy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Will Anything Make You Happy?
Instead of mandating net neutrality, invest resources into providing viable competition. The telco companies have their monopolies because the government granted them. The original thinking was that the investment required to create the networks for cable were so expensive that the government should subsidize the building of them by a single company in each area and then regulate them to ensure customers were not completely ignored. The telcos came up with this plan because they knew that they could then continue to lobby for relaxed regulations while keeping their monopoly. A brilliant plan that has worked wonderfully to produce slow connection speeds, poor customer service, and extremely high prices - this all translates into billions in profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still waiting...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://twitter.com/googlepubpolicy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://twitter.com/googlepubpolicy
Watch the wording choice. Note that they're not denying the *other* reports out there. The NY Times report is wrong that Google is agreeing to paying Verizon to prioritize its traffic. However, they *are* working on the deal described here and elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google deny turned into story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Civil Disobedience
So everyone start jamming, without any pesky guilt. Tho you'd probably want to avoid detection. ;p
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google is not evil
[ link to this | view in chronology ]