Report: Verizon, Google in Net Neutrality Pact

August 5, 2010 -

According to the Washington Post, citing two unnamed sources, Google and Verizon are in a "net neutrality pact" to manage network traffic. Set for an announcement "within days," follows the FCC's push in meetings with network service providers to strike some kind of deal on net neutrality rules. It's unclear how this deal will affect the direction of those discussions, which are apparently ongoing.

The agreement, expected to be announced within days, comes as the Federal Communications Commission tries to get major Internet content firms and network service providers to strike a deal on disputed points of so-called net neutrality rules. It's unclear how the deal will affect the direction of those discussions. The FCC has told the Washington Post that Verizon and Google are still a part of meetings between senior staff and officials of such firms as AT&T, Skype, a cable trade association and the Open Internet Coalition.

Public interest groups has been critical of the closed door meetings with ISPs and the rumored agreement between Verizon and Google, which they see as the government giving Internet firms too much of a voice in the process.

Verizon wouldn't confirm that a deal was struck with Google, but said in an e-mail statement that it has "been working with Google for 10 months to reach an agreement on broadband policy" and that it is "currently engaged in and committed to the negotiation process led by the FCC."

Google and Verizon's agreement could stop Verizon from offering some "prioritization" to partners who want better delivery of content on its DSL and fiber networks, according to the sources. The deal would not be applied to mobile phones, the sources said.

“The fate of the Internet is too large a matter to be decided by negotiations involving two companies, even companies as big as Verizon and Google, or even the six companies and groups engaged in other discussions at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on similar topics," said Gigi Sohn, president of public interest group Public Knowledge.

The six officials at the FCC meetings, which will resume today, are arguing about whether wireless phones should be included in legislation and if carriers can charge for "better quality of service."

Source: Washington Post

Posted in

Comments

Re: Report: Verizon, Google in Net Neutrality Pact

 According to Google's twitter feed,

"@NYTimes is wrong. We've not had any convos with VZN about paying for carriage of our traffic. We remain committed to an open internet."

 

So, that would seem to be that. It's a pretty unsettling proposition, though. Congress and the FCC need to get their acts in gear.

Re: Report: Verizon, Google in Net Neutrality Pact

Interesting how this is a complete 180 to what was said earlier in the day, that this was a Verizon and Google agreement TO prioritize data, thus ending net neuturality. Hell, it was a big breaking news story on MSNBC.com.

Currently, MSNBC.com has an article in the Tech section about the update where Verizon and Google deny talks about tiers.

Also under Tech? What should also be a major headline:

FCC abandons efforts at 'net neutrality' compromise

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38581151/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_...

Re: Report: Verizon, Google in Net Neutrality Pact

I just keep getting new reasons to love Verizon.

 

No, Luke, I AM the Walrus

Re: Report: Verizon, Google in Net Neutrality Pact

TELL US WHAT GOING ON ALREADY FCC!

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
Andrew EisenNo one's crossed a line but I just want to remind you all to keep discussions civil.09/20/2014 - 1:54pm
Craig R.tldr: I'm a gamer, and imo those who support GamerGate should feel free to take a flying leap off a cliff.09/20/2014 - 1:27pm
Craig R.Not only that, I'm pretty sure that if actual studies were done, you'd still deny them, Sleaker. After all, it's not what you'd want to hear to support your rose-colored view of GamerGate.09/20/2014 - 1:18pm
Craig R.There IS an issue. Nor do we need a study to show that if you deny it then you're part of the problem.09/20/2014 - 1:17pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician