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?

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Verizon Also Wants Google To Pay Up”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
discojohnson says:

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

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: 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.

bigpicture says:

Re: 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?

Rand says:

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.

Sobriquet says:

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.

Verizon Tech says:

Re: 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.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re: 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.

Mark says:

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.

Stephen (user link) says:

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!

Anonymous Coward (user link) says:

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!


Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...