Google and Verizon Join Hands for Net Neutrality: Implications Behind OpennessBy Partho, Gaea News Network
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
The net neutrality deal by Google and Verizon has created ripples over the future of Internet Services. Google has been the promoter of open standards all through and the new proposal is just another extension. With the proposal, both the companies would be trying to influence regulators and lawmakers in the debate over the principle known as net neutrality, which promotes that all the Internet users must have equal access to all types of information. According to Google CEO Eric E. Schmidt, the deal could be important for consumers and encourage innovation among the entrepreneurs. Internet service providers won’t be able to block producers of online content or allow them a paid easier access.
The deal would carve out exceptions for Internet access over cellphone networks and potential new services to be offered by broadband providers. The service providers might include advanced educational services, health care monitoring, as well as new entertainment and gaming options.
On the darker side net neutrality could exclude wireless and other online services. Google and Verizon for creating a loophole that could allow carriers to circumvent regulation that would be imposed to ensure openness.
The proposal would exclude cellphone networks because the companies were concerned about the imposition of too many rules, which could slow the growth of wireless Web.
The proposals might exclude the services that broadband providers might create. The services will have to be distinguishable from traditional broadband Internet access services that are not designed to circumvent the rules.
The Metropolitan Opera might stream its performance in 3-D through such a service that would otherwise require too much bandwidth.
There are some anticipations that the companies might bypass open-access regulations. For instance, an online video start-up might create a competitor to YouTube that did not run on the public Internet. It would pay for faster connections to viewers. These types of payments grew the access companies that might have less incentives to invest in Internet capacity.
Overall for the end-users the deal might be beneficial as explained by Eric Schmidt
Google would only operate on the “public Internet” that is accessed by any user, and that it would not cut special deals to deliver YouTube or other services to fixed-wire consumers at a higher rate.