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, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. Google has traditionally been one of the loudest advocates of equal network access for all content providers.
At risk is a principle known as network neutrality: Cable and phone companies that operate the data pipelines are supposed to treat all traffic the same -- nobody is supposed to jump the line. ...
[P]rominent Internet scholars, some of whom have advised President-elect Barack Obama on technology issues, have softened their views on the subject. ...Lawrence Lessig, an Internet law professor at Stanford University and an influential proponent of network neutrality, recently shifted gears by saying at a conference that content providers should be able to pay for faster service.
However, Google hotly disputes the WSJ article, here, and Lessig does so here. First Google's Richard Whitt, writing in his Google Secret Plan to Take Over the World Public Policy Blog:
Some critics have questioned whether improving Web performance through edge caching -- temporary storage of frequently accessed data on servers that are located close to end users -- violates the concept of network neutrality. As I said last summer, this myth -- which unfortunately underlies a confused story in Monday's Wall Street Journal -- is based on a misunderstanding of the way in which the open Internet works. ...
Despite the hyperbolic tone and confused claims in Monday's Journal story, I want to be perfectly clear about one thing: Google remains strongly committed to the principle of net neutrality, and we will continue to work with policymakers in the years ahead to keep the Internet free and open.
And Lessig, from his Lessig 2.0 blog:
I don't know what Google is doing, though if they are trying to negotiate exclusive deals for privileged access, that shows exactly why we need network neutrality regulation.
Missing from the article, however, is the evidence that my view is a "shift" or "soften[ing]" of earlier views. That's because there isn't any such evidence. My view is the view I have always had -- whether or not it is the view of others in this debate.
Also, as Lessig points out in his blog, while the WSJ claims that "some of those who advise the new president on technology have changed their view on network neutrality," the only Obama "adviser" actually mentioned in the article is Lessig (unless you want to count Google CEO Eric Cchmidt).
I have to agree with Lessig that this appears to be a "made-up drama." First the WSJ takes Google's attempts to colocate caching services, then throws in the old news that Microsoft and Yahoo "have withdrawn quietly from a coalition formed two years ago to protect network neutrality" (what does "quietly" mean here, anyway?), then adds the assertion that "prominent Internet scholars, some of whom have advised
President-elect Barack Obama on technology issues, have softened their
views on the subject," yet cites only Lessig. It'll be interesting to see if the paper sticks to its guns.
Comment and Contribute
