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?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Ken H., Jan 5th, 2006 @ 5:07pm

    My Model is even Simpler

    Block my services, lose my business

    Can you hear ME now!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Mark, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 5:28pm

    No Subject Given

    People pay to get on the internet and they should be able to use whatever service or program they want.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    discojohnson, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 5:34pm

    No Subject Given

    this is an example of free market getting too greedy. i'm in favor of free market, but then there are examples like this that foul it up. yeah yeah backbones aren't cheap, but ebusinesses already pay for the service (a net connection to host places like google, /., ms, and even techdirt aren't exactly cheap). i think it's extortion

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Antiverizon, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 5:49pm

    No Subject Given

    Verizon sucks anyway. Leave Google alone.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Chris H, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 6:12pm

    No Subject Given

    Block me from sites, and I drop my Verizon DSL. Are you listening Verizon?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    sped, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 6:18pm

    No Subject Given

    makes sense, its like the gov't taxing a trucking company for using the highways.

    But you could also say its just the cost of doing business as an ISP

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    bigpicture, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:00pm

    Mind Your Own Business

    Google is not in Verizon's business....yet. So why should Verizon want a slice of the Google pie.
    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?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    lexpro, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:26pm

    No Subject Given

    The sooner Verizon does this, the sooner will there be effective competitive broadband service via wireless, powerline, etc. Monopolies such as Verizon can't resist the opportunity to extract above competitive market rates of return and become inefficient as a result. Hurry up, Verizon!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    A Funny Guy, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:35pm

    Re: No Subject Given

    I eat the food grown by local farmers, should they be forced to include me in their profit sharing plan?

    Dear God, yet again the sheer greed of corporate Earth has outdone it's self

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Brian Clarke, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:46pm

    LoL

    WoW. Someone grew big balls. Where the heck does Verizon get off telling me what I can and cannot do with MY internet connetion.

    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.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:46pm

    Free market

    This isn't a free market. Such a horrendous policy of double charging both internet consumers and producers is ONLY possible with regulation protecting the practice. Consumers would switch networks if they were unable to access the services they demanded.

    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.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    rob, Jan 5th, 2006 @ 7:47pm

    No Subject Given

    maybe verizon is planning to give away DSL service and charge google for providing you service!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Mark, Jan 6th, 2006 @ 6:41am

    You are all missing the point

    I absolutely agree with open access however I am also a realist and recognize that the current business model for broadband is based on data revenue as an upsell to other core products. If Google, AOL, Ebay(Skype) and others eat away at these revenue streams (Voice, video, content on demand) than the providers will not be able to justify the expense of building/upgrading their networks.

    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.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Rand, Jan 6th, 2006 @ 9:44am

    Re: No Subject Given

    Wouldn't verizon charging google be double billing? Are we forgetting that we are already paying Verizon to use their network? If it wasn't for Google and other websites, I wouldn't need Verizon. Perhpas the major web sites should start charging Verizon for providing content to Verizons subscribers.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    amasa, Jan 6th, 2006 @ 2:32pm

    hmmmmm

    Maybe, just maybe, one day companies will pay for access *to us* instead of the other way around. HMMMMMMMMMMM.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Sobriquet, Jan 6th, 2006 @ 5:28pm

    Re: No Subject Given

    Difference is, the consumers already pay Verizon to access that information.

    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.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    themusicgod1, Jan 8th, 2006 @ 3:24pm

    Re: My Model is even Simpler

    What when their competition does the same thing?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Verizon Tech, Feb 14th, 2006 @ 10:49pm

    Re: No Subject Given

    I think some of you are looking at this all wrong. You're thinking that by Verizon getting Google to pay for using Verizon to send data to you there'll be a "double payment" which isn't the case. Basically Verizon wants Google to pay for using Verizon's bandwidth to send you the info you requested. It would be like a person having a water well and taking orders for delivery to people then stowing all the water on a trasnport service that's on it's way to your house and then not pay the transport service for doing the work to get it to you. All they're looking for is companies like Google to pay for having Verizon do all the work in getting the info you requested to your PC. And if these companies DON'T end up paying we'll ALL be looking at more expensive internt bills. Cause the longer these companies don't pay the bandwidth usage, the more and more Internet companies are going to charge us for them proivding the internet too us.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    Mike (profile), Feb 14th, 2006 @ 11:06pm

    Re: No Subject Given

    I think some of you are looking at this all wrong. You're thinking that by Verizon getting Google to pay for using Verizon to send data to you there'll be a "double payment" which isn't the case.

    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.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Stephen, May 8th, 2006 @ 11:13am

    Google and others also pay

    Realize Google already pays MILLIONS to connect to the Internet! It is not free at all. All website owners and web service owners pay to connect to the Internet. There is NO FREE RIDE for anyone. The content providers pay, the subscribers pay, no free anything. If a content provider, podcaster, serach engine, website, or online store gets popular, they must pay for even bigger pipes, larger bandwidth, more servers, more data centers, an in many cases multiple peers to the net. How is this free!

    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!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Aug 24th, 2006 @ 1:18pm

    CALEA Big Brother Oh My

    Did you know that CALEA (The communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) will by May 17 of 2007 require all Internet companies who are broadband providers or VOIP providers to provide a way of intercepting your traffic. Did you know that the Internet is no longer free, that it is becoming a highly over regulated communications medium (Voice Video Data) that no longer has the same appeal. Corporate America is going to ruin this country by using their million dollar lobbyist to control our government to put these kinds of regulations in place. We need to support people like the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) and any group that give the people a real voice. In case you havn't checked lately this is not a democracy, we are a replubic and the people have limited say if any at all. It is time for a revolution, but no one will act. We will all just sit around like puppets and watch as our strings are pulled accepting little nibbles at our freedom as necessasary here or required there. By the time they are said and done we will no longer be free. Security at the cost of Liberty is Tyranny, doing nothing and sitting on your ass is passive treason! Peace

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    netpro, Sep 14th, 2006 @ 10:22am

    limited choices

    The problem is your only other choice is the cable company and they're going to do the same thing.

    Users have brought this upon themselves by not supporting independent ISP's and choosing only on price, in my opinion.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 6th, 2007 @ 7:01pm

    hope google teaches a lesson to these service providers... i am sick of paying too much charges set by these service providers... hope we will get into the free world in the mobiles too...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This