Google & Verizon's Real Net Neutrality Proposal

langelgjm writes "Announced this afternoon in a joint conference call held by CEOs Eric Schmidt and Ivan Seidenberg, Google and Verizon have released a joint net neutrality proposal in the form of a 'suggested legislative framework for consideration by lawmakers.' This comes on the heels of last week's assertion (and subsequent denial) that Google and Verizon were close to concluding talks that would permit Verizon to prioritize certain content in exchange for pay. A look at the actual text of the framework shows some positive net neutrality principles, but there is also some more curious content: 'Wireless broadband' is singled out for exclusion from most of the agreement, and providers would be permitted to prioritize 'additional online services... distinguishable in scope and purpose.' Public Knowledge, a watchdog group based in Washington, has criticized the agreement for these provisions."

Comments

Lesser of two evils?

[lawnboy5-O]

We either get Big Corporate or Big Government deciding on what, when, how, and how fast... I am not sure I want either, and consider it the end of the Internet as we know it.

Re:Lesser of two evils?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

Funny the internet that I knew the longest was operated by big government.

Re:why the fuck are these people deciding?

[MozeeToby]

This is equivalent to writing your representative and saying "This is how I think this issue should be handled". I'd rather see companies doing this and trying to put forward workable compromises than throwing hundreds of millions of dollars into lobbyists.

three bad VAGUE things

[TheGratefulNet]

from the text:

(1) sending and receiving lawful content of their choice;

(2) running lawful applications and using lawful services of their choice; and

(3) connecting their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network or
service, facilitate theft of service, or harm other users of the service

LAWFUL? what the fuck is that all about? now, we have to have layer8, the LAWFUL INSPECTION layer, before we can send the PDU?

this is stoopid. lawful this, legal that. lets just insert a truly literal (cough) policing layer in the IP stuck. sure, why not. its now 'in the spec' (so to speak).

and point 3 is a nice gotcha: if you are using up 'too much' b/w you can be classified as 'doing harm'. if you ping to discover, you could be seen as 'doing harm'.

nice. or, should I say, nice try, assholes.