by Mike Masnick
Mon, Aug 9th 2010 3:14pm
If you read the tech news, you certainly saw today's reports of a announced deal between Google and Verizon over net neutrality. The two companies outlined the "proposal" on their own website, and it basically looks like exactly what was discussed last week, despite vehement (and, at times, mocking) denials by the CEOs of both companies about last week's reports. This isn't a "deal," so much as a "proposal," and by "proposal," they seem to mean "vague assertions that don't mean much." The crux of it seems to be that Google and Verizon agree that traffic shouldn't be tiered on your everyday internet, but it's fine on some new not-really-the-internet network, as well as wireless networks (where much of the world is moving anyway). It's not hard to see how this is really about leaving lots of loopholes open for both companies, but I'm still trying to figure out if this announcement means anything. It's a framework for the FCC, but it's not clear that the FCC will use it or should use it. Even if they do, I keep reading through it to find out what's different from the way things are now, and I can't find anything. It seems to be a proposal that says "here's the way things already stand" in new language. So, frankly, I can't see reasons to be upset or happy about this, because it's not saying much of anything.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- The Boston Globe Will No Longer Let John Sununu Shill For Telecom Companies Under The Pretense Of Objectivity
- As India Goes After Google, A Simple Question: Do You Really Want Governments Deciding Search Results?
- Universal Music Has No Sense Of Humor, Takes Down Hilarious Twitter Profile Pun Parody Of Nirvana Song
- Google Lobbied Against Real Net Neutrality In India, Just Like It Did In The States
- Dianne Feinstein Worries That Net Neutrality Will Block ISPs From Censoring 'Terrorist' Content She Doesn't Like