Google, Verizon Said to Have Deal on Web Traffic

Apparently, Verizon and Google reached a deal on how to handle Internet traffic, striking their own accord on policy being weighed by the Federal Communications Commission.

The compromise would restrict Verizon from selectively slowing Internet content that travels over its wires, but wouldn't apply such limits to Internet use on mobile phones. Verizon and Google have been adversaries over the issue, known as network neutrality. Verizon was among cable and phone companies saying they need leeway over the delivery of Web content to protect performance of their networks. Google led content providers and advocacy groups that say restrictions are needed so communications companies don't favor their own online offerings or those of partners.

"What is good for Google and Verizon is not necessarily good for innovation and competition on the Internet," said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, senior vice president of the Media Access Project, a public-interest law firm. The FCC must "stay the course" and enact rules "that benefit everyone, not just the largest companies," Schwartzman said.

Free Press president and CEO Josh Silver said, "If true, the deal is a bold grab for market power by two monopolistic players. Such abuse of the open Internet would put to final rest the Google mandate to 'do no evil. If reports are accurate, such a deal would effectively create two Internets where application and content innovators have to ask Verizon and Google for permission to reach mobile Internet customers. Such a deal would make it more difficult for independent and diverse speakers to reach a broad audience and diminish the value of the mobile Internet as a new marketplace for ideas. It would mean that mobile consumers would no longer be able to access the same websites, applications and software as anyone else on the Internet."

Gigi B. Sohn, president and co-founder of Public Knowledge, said, "The deal between Verizon and Google about how to manage Internet traffic is deeply regrettable and should be considered meaningless. As a legal agreement, it is not binding on either company. As an agreement in principle, it should not be taken as a template or basis for Congressional action. The fate of the Internet is too large a matter to be decided by negotiations involving two companies, even companies as big as Verizon and Google, or even the six companies and groups engaged in other discussions at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on similar topics."