Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Google: Fight for Net Neutrality

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

June 8, 2006, 12:23 PM

With the United States House of Representatives set to vote on a bill that would enable Internet providers to charge for priority access to their networks, Google is asking consumers to speak out. The search engine, along with Microsoft, Yahoo and others, say the bill would create a two-tiered system.

In an open letter posted on the Google Web site, company CEO Eric Schmidt says action must be taken to protect the Internet. He claims that smaller companies who cannot afford to pay will be pushed to the side in the name of profiteering.

"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," Schmidt wrote. "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."

The telecom industry claims that it has no intention to create a two-tier content delivery system, and are simply fighting for control of their networks. Internet providers say they should have the right to charge companies who are using more bandwidth-intensive applications, such as audio and video.

But few are buying that explanation. Last month, musician Moby spoke out against the effort, demanding alongside Massachusetts Democratic Representative Edward Markey that Congress pass some type of legislation that would ensure the free flow of data through the Internet.

"If Congress guts Net Neutrality, independent music and news sites would be choked off, consumer choice would be limited, and the Internet will be become a private toll road auctioned off by companies like AT&T," Moby warned.

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

Add a Comment (28 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By abholder

edited Nov 27, 2006 - 9:06 PM

This like many laws before, will not see the light of day. Equality is bought with blood or money. If this passes they should do this for every type of monopoly, ans make america great through its people not its big corporations.

Score: 0

By rcharles

edited Jun 8, 2006 - 3:24 PM

Verizon has already bought the PA legislature, getting a bill passed that prevents any PA municipality from implementing a municipal wi-fi network and forcing them to pay and wait for Verizon.

Pending national legislation will give Verizon another monopoly to raise already too-high broadband prices and further taxing the inovative comanies like Google who create value.

We must fight to have net neutrality language in any national legislation. This is a no-brainer except for the millions Verizon is pouring into congress to buy their next monopoly.

R C Gray

Score: 0

By The.Frozen.One

edited Jun 8, 2006 - 1:25 PM

If these amendments are shot down, this will effectively KILL the internet... it won't happen overnight, but slowly a multi-tiered system of intenet access and payment will ensue.

Score: 0

By radioactive21

edited Jun 9, 2006 - 4:20 AM

SORRY for double post my browser was being stupid.

Score: 0

By radioactive21

edited Jun 9, 2006 - 4:20 AM

Lets put it this way, sites like Youtube, xanga, myspace, friendster, etc would be out of bussiness becasuse the cost of maintaining them would be outrageous.

IF you want to explain it to your not so technically knowledgeable friends. Tell them those sites would be pushed out of business or have to charge HIGH monthly fees.

Score: 0

By zridling

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 6:50 PM

This is a choice between whether you'll want the republicans to finally kill the internet — or at least make it unaffordable and slow — in the interests of corporate windfall profits over users. If the republicans had been in power in Congress in the 60s and 80s, what we know as the internet would have never happened. Lawrence Lessing sums up the whole issue quite well.

Score: 0

By iLLz

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 6:27 PM

I sent mine in, I emplore everyone to do the same. Maybe for once, someone will lieten to the people on the issues. (Wishful thinking) I hate greed.

Score: 0

By Don't Regulate

edited Jun 8, 2006 - 6:01 PM

The rhetoric on this issue is amazing. What Google and others are pushing for is actually MORE REGULATION. The internet was founded on light or no regulation and many of these companies wouldn't even exist if more regulations were put on the Internet in its infancy. Know how many times a service provider has abused its power of access? Exactly once. And the FCC quickly acted. Google, EBay and others are BILLION dollar companies and want to the government to REGULATE in order to give them an advantage. The service providers are simply saying "let the market decide." Isn't the market a better place for the Internet to flourish than Washington, DC?

Score: 0

By jay1221

edited Jun 9, 2006 - 3:51 PM

While I'm generally in support of less regulation, you have to realize that the cable companies are NOT letting the market decide this issue. The fact is, cable in the US is almost universally monopolized by one company per region (I've seen a statistic that said 2% of the US population is served by more than one cable provider). The cable companies would like you to believe this is because of 'prohibitivly high costs of laying cable'. It's really because of the meshwork of local franchising laws that inhibit any competition whatsoever. Even in relatively large markets, where there would be plenty of room for more than one cable internet provider, local laws bar competition, and startups are generally saddled with unfair requirements for providing public access time and things like that. Just look at what is happening with Verison's attempt at deploying TV over fiber. Regulations are neccessary because the market has already been hamstrung by special interests. Our only choice is to fight politics with politics, or go back to dial-up. Welcome to America.

Score: 0

By Grazer

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 7:24 PM

The internet wouldn't exist if more regulations weren't on it in its infancy. It is only a recent change in how services are classified that has allowed them to even consider the abolishment of net neutrality. If net neutrality is done away with, we may suddenly start seeing error pages that say. "I'm sorry, this hosting company has only paid *your isp* for this much bandwidth, so you, a paying customer, have to suffer.

The basic argument for the deneutralization is that certain sites are eating more bandwidth, than others and putting a larger strain on their networks. To translate this, what the ISPs are really saying is "sites with streaming music, video, and high speed downloads cause our users to actually use the bandwidth they pay us for."

Score: 0

By Dirrty_Harry

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 5:29 PM

wtf... im from germany and i wnna sign up at both sites... but i cnt, cuz im not from the states.
common its still gnna affect me if i goto the states. they should change it so people from other countries can still be heard!
imagine what it would be like if they get emails from the entire world!! god... whoever made those sites is dumb..

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 5:32 PM

If they break net neutrality, how do you think that will affect the priority of traffic coming from and going to the US?

Lowest priority. getting out of the US on the net, or getting in from outside will be rather futile.

Score: 0

By Joe Dirt

edited Jun 8, 2006 - 4:17 PM

I've written my Reps.

Telecoms are commies.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 4:31 PM

No, if they were commies, we'd all have unlimited internet access.

...but all the bandwidth would be reserved for the elite class.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 3:37 PM

im sure we will find away around getting charged, even if we have to break into a telcom canter and take it over:-P

uh but we cant let this pass...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Jun 8, 2006 - 4:32 PM

Techies of the world unite! Break down the doors of your tier-1 internet backbone providers and force them, by whatever means necessary (Up to and including, fish-slapping and shrubberies), to hand over control to those to whom it should belong in the first place!

NERDS!
GEEKS!
DWEEBS!

Unless they're guarded by jocks....

Then run screaming to Mommy....

That is all, you may now return to slaying the evil Drow to save the three-breasted princess of Quaxycotl.

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 3:19 PM

telecoms just need any ol' law to charge.

I've written my rep.

Score: 0

By dmainzman

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 3:18 PM

This is the first article I've read about Net Neurtrality that actually makes sense. Now I understand what they're voting on.
The very name of the issue, net neutrality, has been confusing. Isn't neutrality good? Why would such non-evil companies like Google be against neutrality on the internet?
Ah, but anyway... I definately see this bill passing, because with the republicans in charge... we're all screwed.
And that's my opinion.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 3:27 PM

F@CK the republican. The only republicans I like are Gulianni, Bloomberg and Mccain. They actually representing the citizens All other republicans are scumbags

Score: 0

By thyme41

edited Aug 15, 2006 - 5:36 PM

I'm a conservative, and I'm totally against this bill. It's not just the republicans that are trying to get this passed. There are conservative people that like freedom too.

The issue is ATT and Time Warner's monopoly, which everyone no matter what their political affiliation should be against.

Score: 0

By MMPD

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 4:16 PM

nice unwarrented bashing.... :|

Score: 0

By GCoder

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 2:07 PM

get bent telecom industry...

Score: 0

By iamtux

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 1:56 PM

Sent from both sites. This is a blatant and outright attempt by the telecom-rich to get richer at the expense of users. What makes me so angry is that there are thousands of people out there who would have no idea what Net Neutrality was and who wouldn't know the difference until it was too late.

Score: 0

By MoonDogg

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 1:50 PM

Sent my letter's in... Hope yall do the same... :-)

Score: 0

By tenebrusmke79

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 1:38 PM

I have Roadrunner, and I sent two emails to the congress people in my state, I don't think Cable and Phone companies have any rights to choose what people would want to see or do.. It's sad that they'd try to do that.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jun 8, 2006 - 12:40 PM

Done.

Hit both sites on their page.

I strongly suggest everyone else here do the same.

Score: 0

Sep 5 - 7:10 PM ET Red Hat buys virtualization specialist Qumranet

Sep 5 - 7:06 PM ET Analysts: Online news viewers rising as newspaper readership falls

Sep 5 - 6:55 PM ET Where does Sarah Palin stand on technology issues?

Sep 5 - 6:51 PM ET Adobe Flash to deliver NFL games in full

Sep 5 - 4:29 PM ET Exclusive beta invitation from GameTap and BetaNews

Sep 5 - 4:09 PM ET Report: OLPC buy one, give one deal returns

Sep 5 - 3:45 PM ET No ruling yet in TiVo vs. EchoStar patent case

Sep 5 - 3:37 PM ET Google Analytics starts tracking Chrome, with intriguing results

Sep 5 - 2:14 PM ET Comcast challenges FCC's authority in sanction appeal

Sep 5 - 2:06 PM ET An ad about nothing: First Seinfeld + Gates ad omitted Vista