Net neutrality - Thank you Al Franken

[Bluesman2008]

FCC Commissioners Copps, Clyburn Strongly Support Open Internet | FDL News Desk

Get active folks. Let your congress people hear from you. That's the only way they'll get off the dime and tell Verizon and Google to stuff their tiered programming where the sun don't shine.

[Ads]

[mrkabc]

Because we are good enough, smart enough, and gosh darn it... people LIKE us.

[redbearde]

Bluesman, would you mind explaining in depth what your position is and what you want the government to force VZ to no longer do? I'm not trying to pick a fight - I really want to know. Thanks.

[jkhonea]

I am going to keep a really close eye on this thread. Let's keep it informative and please keep it non political. No Democrats or Republicans. Let's just stick to the topic at hand. I'm not that worried about y'all keeping in check, but I will nuke the thread if it goes sideways.

Thanks, and I'm actually looking forward to reading the details on this.

[redbearde]

Since bluesman hasn't replied, I thought I'd say a little something on the subject. jkhonea, I won't attack people; if I attack anything, then it'll be ideas. Fear not, I'm a moderator on another site m'self, and I know exactly what you're afraid of (I largely moderate our politics forum).

Anyway, bluesman might be referring to something like this.

Yesterday, Bloomberg reported that Verizon and Google have made a deal on network neutrality policy they'd like to see in America. That deal (surprise!) is Google can get special privileges on Verizon's network. The Huffington Post splash page mocks Google's slogan: "Don't Be Evil" with an asterisk. Asterisk: "unless it's profitable." Josh Silver called it the end of the Internet as we know it.

I want to explain why I think this deal matters, and why it doesn't. And it might not be for the reasons you think.

The Deal

Net neutrality is simply a proposed rule forbidding Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and other ISPs from engaging in special deals to block or favor certain content on the Internet; it's to keep the Internet an open general purpose network equally accessed by all innovators, speakers, and businesses. Like it is today. The carriers want to turn it into a controlled medium.

Among other things, according to the New York Times, the deal essentially says that Verizon will be able to cut special deals with any company--like, um, one called Google--to prioritize that company's traffic, giving that company an advantage online over any other content online. Google decided it could make more money getting special--or even exclusive--treatment on the Verizon network because few of their competitors could afford to get the same treatment.

(Note: Google is denying the Times report through a Tweet. I'll spell out the implications assuming the Times is right.)

Business Examples

So, as a business matter, let's say you use a Verizon mobile wireless card (an EVDO card) for your laptop (in addition to having a a Verizon mobile computer).

Google's products can get priority on your laptop based on commercial deals.

Google's Youtube may get Verizon-special treatment denied any competing video site, from Blip.tv to Netflix. (This is the example given by the New York Times today.)

Google's Orkut, a social network once known only for being big in Brazil, gets better treatment than Facebook. 

Google's Blogger--a blogging technology--gets the Verizon-special preference denied WordPress.

Google's Chrome browser happens to work a lot better than Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox.

Google's GChat video gets special treatment compared to video phone services like Video Skype.

Google's Gmail, an email service, gets better treatment than Hotmail or Yahoo!

Google Books gets special treatment denied any competitors.

Google's domain name service gets preferred treatment denied competitors like OpenDNS, which could even be blocked under the deal.

Google's advertising network can get Verizon network priorities.

Google's Froogle site gets special treatment denied everything from Groupon to Ebay to all those random "deal of the day" sites.

Google Voice could get special treatment compared with those other online phone services.

Google's Picasa could get special treatment over Flikr, for photo albums.

Google's Buzz could somehow get special treatment over Twitter.

Even Google Wave could get priority... Really.


So, as a business matter, the deal is important. And, yes, it may be the end of the Internet as we know it, if the FCC blessed such deals. The deal yesterday announces that Verizon and Google open the door to all of this.

I'm not going through and recreating all the links, but the most notable one, I think, might be where Google has flatly denied the NY Times report.

Basically, my understanding of the net-neutrality concern is that VZ or AT&T could make a deal with another company, be it google or a certain news website, wherein the ISP would give the other company priority access to bandwidth...which would make, for instance, MSNBC or FOX faster than the other. Net Neutrality legislation or regulation would supposedly prevent a company from doing this.

I would think, though, that if VZ was doing this, then perhaps AT&T could advertise, "we offer unfettered access to the internet unlike this OTHER company"...rather like VZ did so successfully with the data coverage maps that just slammed AT&T. It also, to my knowledge, hasn't happened yet (if I'm wrong about that, then, by all means, someone correct me please). So we're talking about creating new regulations or legislations because people have active imaginations.

[Eric Cumbee]

as much as i agree with the concept of net neutrality, it scares me to death about what the federal government(especially the present administration) might do in the name of network neutrality.

[mjs31]

as much as i agree with the concept of net neutrality, it scares me to death about what the federal government(especially the present administration) might do in the name of network neutrality.

Oh oh...drifting into no no territory.

I like the idea of net neutrality as well. Giving one company special treatment will not benefit the end user in the long run.

[Eric Cumbee]

the free market will settle it, the government will make it worse.

[jkhonea]

the free market will settle it, the government will make it worse.

I agree with this part. I prefer keeping it within the free market decision area.

[mjs31]

the free market will settle it, the government will make it worse.

No no no....we need to Gov to run this. Wake up people...we must let them do their thing. It is the only way this will work.