FUD: http://en.wikipedia.org/...
The media loves controversy - they make more money when things get ugly. As such it is in their best interests to stir up fear, uncertainty, and doubt. It seems as though no one has actually read the actual policy proposal they filed with the FCC.
This is a policy proposal. This is Google and Verizon (two large actors in the Internet space) making a suggestion to the FCC about net neutrality. The suggestion boils down to this: keep things the way they are. This is explicitly the case for wired internet, and discussion about wireless has been put on hold both as a way to just get the ball moving sooner rather than later and because wireless is SO much more complicated that wired. For good or ill there are FAR fewer players in wired internet than there are in wireless.
Net Neutrality has been on the back-burner for years. Congress wasn't moving on it and the FCC wasn't moving on it. As such Google seems to have decided to work with one of the largest ISPs and put out a joint statement. The hope I think is twofold:
- Verizon is a huge player in the market and likely is someone Congress-critters would not want to go head-to-head with. Now though, they see that Google and Verizon have publicly agreed to a set of practices. This being the case, Congress can be a little more comfortable putting some policy in place without thinking they will become involved in a knock-down-drag-out fight with Verizon. Now they might have to fight against the other big ISPs, but at least they know they would have Google and Verizon in their corner.
- As I mention above, neither Congress nor the FCC has been moving at all with regards to Net Neutrality. As such, the press has been mum as well. Now that this joint proposal has gone out EVERYONE is talking about Net Neutrality! Everyone is saying that the proposal doesn't go far enough! What this likely means is that people are calling their Congress-critters screaming that they want full-on Net Neutrality, above and beyond what the proposal says. This means Congress might come to think the same and will start moving on Net Neutrality, taking the proposal as a starting point and (if they have the spines to do so) possibly go even further. This can only be good for the consumers.
Something else I want to mention is the whole hullabaloo about "extra/other/special services." Everybody is saying "its going to create a two tiered internet, blah blah, blah, FUD, FUD, FUD!" Nothing is going to change! The proposal says the public internet level of services cannot change, so if service providers want to provide extra services over the lines (like VOIP phone service, or special extended content) it can not be at the expense of the public internet speeds/access/etc. Service providers ALREADY provide these "extra/other/special services."
Also, there is no "deal" between Google and Verizon on this. If someone can show me the signed contracts between Google and Verizon showing that there is some sort of business deal between them regarding better access or whatnot, then please do. I will take this point back. Everything we have seen though (from the parties themselves, not from the press) shows that this was a policy proposal, AND NOTHING MORE.
Finally, Vint Cerf (the guy who invented TCP/IP (the protocol the internet basically runs on)), an internet luminary and outspoken proponent of net neutrality works for Google, and still works for Google. He has not left because of this:
http://www.cbc.ca/...
Do I think this has been a PR nightmare for Google? Yes. Do I think in the end this will improve the state of Net Neutrality when all the dust clears? Yes.
If you want the info from the horses mouth:
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.c...
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.c...
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.c...