Thursday, July 15, 2010

Tailored and Effective “Third Way”



Today we submitted comments supporting the FCC’s proposed Third Way. In a letter to the agency two months ago, Google along with other technology companies expressed the view that the Third Way framework “will create a legally sound, light-touch regulatory framework that benefits consumers, technology companies and broadband Internet access providers.” We still believe this is a true statement.

The recent Comcast decision re-opened some fundamental questions about the FCC’s jurisdiction over broadband Internet services. On balance the Third Way framework -- which would apply only in a limited manner to only the transmission component of broadband Internet service -- presents a predictable, effective, and tailored approach.

19 comments:

Michael said...

Dear Google - I would like it if you could please clarify your position on net neutrality in light of your pending discussions with Verizon and others, as reported in today's NY Times:

Google and Verizon Near Deal on Pay Tiers for Web
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: August 4, 2010


WASHINGTON — Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege....Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service."

This last paragraph I find especially troubling. Care to explain and/or clarify please?

kirwin said...

Dear Google:

I notice in today's NYT ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html? ) that Google and Verizon are teaming up for what *sounds* like an exercise in non-network-neutrality.

Would you please explain this? Google has been such a strong advocate for net-neutrality, that I can't help but think I'm misunderstanding something. A clear public statement on this matter would be very welcome.

Thanks!
Ken

kirwin said...

Dear Google:

I notice in today's NYT ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html? ) that Google and Verizon are teaming up for what *sounds* like an exercise in non-network-neutrality.

Would you please explain this? Google has been such a strong advocate for net-neutrality, that I can't help but think I'm misunderstanding something. A clear public statement on this matter would be very welcome.

Thanks!
Ken

Zach said...

What's the deal with abandoning net neutrality in favor of deals with Verizon... WTF Google, I've always backed Google because of the don't be evil mantra. Never again, ever.

Joogle said...

Is it true you are striking a deal with Verizon to win favored status on their network? Eric Schmidt confirmed discussions with telcos. This is disappointing. Whatever happened to 'Do no Evil'?

Harry said...

Hey, Google, do you remember this? http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality_letter.html

Whatever happened to the championship of Net Neutrality?

What happened to "don't be evil"?

Thelius said...

I am curious if this new "third way" is a backroom deal with Verizon to receive preferential access for money as the New York Times has reported today http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html?_r=1. A clarification on your policy would seem to be in order as this seems contrary to your well documented past positions on the subject.

Head Honcho said...

Wow, what a load of horseshit you are slinging. googles days are number my friend, if this is what you're trying to push...

From "do no evil" to "can't beat'em, join'em"

Sad days ahead people

Luis said...

Nice. Way to back down google.

REALLY, REALLY dissapointed in Google.

So much for the "dont be evil" mantra!

I'm sure there are plenty of people out there against net neutrality, and I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it if you had the freedom to choose your broadband ISP. Unfortunately 90% or more of the country does not!

Harry B. Garland said...

What ever happened to your idea 1 year ago in which you promoted an Internet where "consumers make the ULTIMATE choices"? What's with this new interest in protecting Internet access providers?

BonJo said...

What happened to GOOGLE's belief in Internet Neutrality? That surely is the RIGHT THING for the public interest over corporate domination of the Internet. Communication is already limited by the vertical and horizontal monopolies of every avenue of news coverage. PLEASE don't abdicate the only right position that this ONE neutral source of news, open to the public, remains neutral and open for the public. PLEASE don't allow $$$ to pay the corporate way thru congress to the detriment of common good AGAIN!

Branden said...

Is the Third Way a way which gives Google and its services precedent over other, competing services? Because that sounds pretty evil.

Ryan Rabac said...

I was hoping someone could expand on this article from the NYTimes about Google and Verizon collaborating to restrict content. It seems like a 180 from Google's previous position, and it troubles me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html?_r=5&pagewanted=1&hp

Peter said...

What happened?



"A Note to Google Users on Net Neutrality:

The Internet as we know it is facing a serious threat. There's a debate heating up in Washington, DC on something called "net neutrality" – and it's a debate that's so important Google is asking you to get involved. We're asking you to take action to protect Internet freedom.

In the next few days, the House of Representatives is going to vote on a bill that would fundamentally alter the Internet. That bill, and one that may come up for a key vote in the Senate in the next few weeks, would give the big phone and cable companies the power to pick and choose what you will be able to see and do on the Internet.

Today the Internet is an information highway where anybody – no matter how large or small, how traditional or unconventional – has equal access. But the phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest. They want to build a two-tiered system and block the on-ramps for those who can't pay.

Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight. Please call your representative (202-224-3121) and let your voice be heard.

Thanks for your time, your concern and your support.

Eric Schmidt" --Summer 2006

Jim said...

Of all the companies to try and squash true net neutrality -- this is more than disappointing. It's near criminal. I'm not naive regarding corporations' first priority of making money, but I didn't suspect Google was this stupid, or evil. Here's why...

1) I will start using Google as little as possible. I suspect others will as well. You are hurting your own bottom line.

2) This "third way" has little chance of happening; the Obama administration will have to "grow a pair" and fight this publicly.

3) You just threw away your reasonably good public perception to be replaced as the "biggest threat to the Net/world" that Microsoft once had. Nice move winner!

Bye-bye Google search, hello Bing (NEVER thought I would say that...).

Jim said...

Of all the companies to try and squash true net neutrality -- this is more than disappointing. It's near criminal. I'm not naive regarding corporations' first priority of making money, but I didn't suspect Google was this stupid, or evil. Here's why...

1) I will start using Google as little as possible. I suspect others will as well. You are hurting your own bottom line.

2) This "third way" has little chance of happening; the Obama administration will have to "grow a pair" and fight this publicly.

3) You just threw away your reasonably good public perception to be replaced as the "biggest threat to the Net/world" that Microsoft once had. Nice move winner!

Bye-bye Google search, hello Bing (NEVER thought I would say that...).

Casey said...

I also can't believe that Google, of all companies, jumped into bed with Verizon on this issue. Google has long been a champion of what most would view as "business morality", but their joint proposal with Verizon goes to show that the more power one gains, the more corrupt one becomes.

It's really a crying shame that Google is looking to get some room on the bed that all the other big corporations engage in their money orgy on. The sad part is that we (the consumer) are an unwilling participant and are trapped underneath all the corporate weight. With politicians participating by holding us down by the neck with one hand and taking corporate pay offs with the other, our only hope to escape is if someone company follows a moral compass and stands up for us. I thought for a while that this may be Google, but it seems that now they're just standing in line for their turn to take advantage of us.

Chris said...

I was a huge Google supporter. I use Google apps for my business. I have an Android phone. I helped many business associates switch to Google apps over the years. But this, this right here, marks the beginning of the end of my love for Google. We all know the web is going wireless over the next 5-10 years and land lines will be irrelevant. This "third way" is not satisfactory at all.

As of today I am going back from Chrome to Firefox as my default browser and making Bing my default search engine.

This is really disappointing.

Shaun said...

Google is proposing no Net Neutrality on wireless networks? That's evil.