With its mobile future staked on Android and its video aspirations pinned on YouTube, Google’s teaming with Verizon Communications Inc. on Net neutrality should come as no surprise.
On Monday, the two companies, once at opposite ends of the open-Web debate, published a “legislative framework" for governing Net neutrality. Their suggestion “properly empowers" consumers and “gives the FCC a role carefully tailored for the new world of broadband," Alan Davidson, Google’s director of public policy and Tom Tauke, Verizon’s executive vice president of public affairs, policy and communications, wrote in a joint blog. The proposal will allow broadband providers to “manage their networks and provide new types of online services," Davidson and Tauke added.
The manifesto came as the FCC suddenly called off its controversial “closed-door" meetings with Net neutrality stakeholders.
Google's decision to snuggle up to Verizon should come as no surprise. Google needs Verizon and Verizon needs Google, especially as Apple Inc.’s iPhone dominates the booming smartphone world. Many of the mobile devices Verizon sells run on Google’s Android operating system, and they’re proving formidable rivals to the iPhone. Meanwhile, smartphone users are gobbling data in the form of mobile video. In June, The Nielsen Co. said that in 2010’s first quarter alone, the mobile video audience grew 51.2 percent year-over-year, surpassing 20 million users for the first time. However, much of the revenue the two companies crave could depend on whether they convince the FCC to see Net neutrality their way – with less regulation, and more subsidization.
Who Wins?
In essence, Google and Verizon want to strip the FCC of substantive enforcement capabilities, reducing the agency to a reports-writer and occasional issuer of fines. At the same time, they want to receive Universal Service Fund (USF) handouts for broadband deployments and avoid paying pricey intercarrier compensation expenses.
Verizon and Google – one of the most vocal proponents of Net neutrality, to date – acknowledge that reasonable network management is necessary to mitigate congestion and ensure network security. Those “could include traffic prioritization" – the exact action that prompted the FCC to go after Comcast Corp. in 2008. The FCC lost that case.
Google was seen as one of the losers, too, because its traffic could face prioritization. But now the Internet company has sided with Verizon, saying that the FCC role’s should be to enforce consumer protections and non-discrimination requirements as individual complaints arise. The Commission “would have no rulemaking authority" over protections or non-discrimination, but could impose fines of up to $2 million for “knowing violations" of consumer protections and non-discrimination. But the definition of “knowing" could prove tricky. And what’s $2 million to corporations that report billions in annual revenue and profit?
