Welcome back to Gauravonomics Blog! If you still haven't subscribed to my feed, subscribe now in a feed reader or by e-mail and you'll never miss a single post!
Vishsh Kumar and Christopher Rhoads at WSJ report that Google wants its own fast track on the web –
The celebrated openness of the Internet — network providers are not supposed to give preferential treatment to any traffic — is quietly losing powerful defenders.
Google Inc. has approached major cable and phone companies that carry Internet traffic with a proposal to create a fast lane for its own content. Google has traditionally been one of the loudest advocates of equal network access for all content providers.
Separately, Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc. have withdrawn quietly from a coalition formed two years ago to protect network neutrality. Each company has forged partnerships with the phone and cable companies. In addition, prominent Internet scholars (like Lawrence Lessig), some of whom have advised President-elect Barack Obama on technology issues, have softened their views on the subject.
The contentious issue has wide ramifications for the Internet as a platform for new businesses. If companies like Google succeed in negotiating preferential treatment, the Internet could become a place where wealthy companies get faster and easier access to the Web than less affluent ones… (and) choke off competition.
For computer users, it could mean that Web sites by companies not able to strike fast-lane deals will respond more slowly than those by companies able to pay. In the worst-case scenario, the Internet could become a medium where large companies, such as Comcast Corp. in cable television, would control both distribution and content — and much of what users can access.
During his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama spoke frequently about the Internet, which was a critical tool in his grass-roots effort to reach new voters, and the importance of network neutrality.
Google’s proposed arrangement with network providers, internally called OpenEdge, would place Google servers directly within the network of the service providers. The setup would accelerate Google’s service for users. Google has asked the providers it has approached not to talk about the idea, according to people familiar with the plans.
Asked about OpenEdge, Google said only that other companies such as Yahoo and Microsoft could strike similar deals if they desired. But Google’s move, if successful, would give it an advantage available to very few.
Richard Whitt, Google’s head of public affairs, denies the company’s proposal would violate network neutrality. Nevertheless, he says he’s unsure how committed President-elect Obama will remain to the principle.
Google’s Richard Whitt insists on the Google Policy Blog that edge caching does not violate its definition of net neutrality, and many bloggers have supported that view, but it seems to me that any arrangement between content providers and carriers that makes some content load faster that others is indeed against the principle of net neutrality, if not against its technical definition.
It also seems to me that, with the new ambivalence of Google, Microsoft and Yahoo on net neutrality, the debate on net neutrality is being reframed from “carriers vs. content providers” to “big content providers vs. small content providers”.
Finally, it seems to me that the sceptics who feared that Google has become too big to stay true to its “do no evil” motto were right. I’m too invested into Google’s many services to stop using them, but I’ll start migrating away from them slowly. I hope others will see the writing on the wall and also take similar steps.
In the end, all I can say is: et tu Google!
Also see: Om Malik, Lawrence Lessig, Doc Searls, Broadband Politics, TechDirt, Save the Internet, Beyond Search, Gizmodo, Broadstuff, Read Write Web, GoogleWatch, Sidecut Reports, Steve Schultze, Computer World IT Blogwatch, CNet, Broadband DSL Reports, TeleCompetitor, Portfolio, Network World, ZDNet Between the Lines, PaidContent, Isen Blog, Ed Felten.
Related posts:
