{"id":2490,"date":"2010-08-07T02:19:03","date_gmt":"2010-08-07T09:19:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=2490"},"modified":"2010-08-07T02:19:03","modified_gmt":"2010-08-07T09:19:03","slug":"action-alert-google-dont-be-evil","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2010\/08\/07\/action-alert-google-dont-be-evil\/","title":{"rendered":"Action Alert: Google, Don’t Be Evil!"},"content":{"rendered":"

I trust you know that I am a long term advocate of Net Neutrality.  At present, it is under severe threat from corporate telecommunications giants, who may have been joined by Google, a former ally in the battle to keep the Internet open.  Here is an explanation of the issue, followed by a petition I urge you to sign.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"netneutrality\"<\/a> That’s what The New York Times<\/a> recently suggested when it reported that Google and Verizon are nearing an agreement where Google would not oppose the broadband provider if it wants to charge Website owners a fee for the privilege of delivering content more quickly to end users. If true, the Google-Verizon pact has the potential of doing an end run around the Federal Communication Commission’s recent attempts to preserve an open Internet.<\/p>\n

Google and Verizon have denied the Times’ report. Verizon posted a public comment <\/a>on its blog saying the Times report "fundamentally misunderstands our purpose …our goal is an Internet policy framework that ensures openness and accountability, and incorporates specific FCC authority, while maintaining investment and innovation. To suggest this is a business arrangement between our companies is entirely incorrect." Verizon’s statement did not explicitly deny it was negotiating with Google.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, a Google spokesperson recently told UK newspaper The Independent<\/a> that Google has "not had any conversations with Verizon about paying for carriage of Google traffic." The search giant says it remains committed to an open Internet.<\/p>\n

What is Net Neutrality?<\/h6>\n

At its core, net neutrality means that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) would be prohibited from slowing down Internet access speeds based on what you were doing on<\/strong>line.<\/p>\n

Activities like video streaming or peer-to-peer file sharing would have to be delivered to you at the same speed as less data-intensive functions like e-mail and basic Web browsing.<\/p>\n

Implications for You<\/h6>\n

If the Times’ report is true, this would mean that you would get fast access over a broadband connection only to Websites and online services that are willing to pay ISPs for speedy delivery<\/strong>. Websites that didn’t pay would be slower to load and less usable.<\/p>\n

The fear is that without net neutrality, new and innovative online businesses would not be able to pay the delivery costs to compete against larger Internet companies with deeper pockets like Amazon, Google, or Microsoft.<\/p>\n

Schmidt Sings A Different Tune<\/h6>\n

While Google’s assertion that it is committed to an open Internet may sound reassuring, recent statements by company CEO Eric Schmidt suggest otherwise. In fact, Schmidt appears to confirm the worst fears of open Internet advocates by redefining what net neutrality means<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

London’s Telegraph reportes<\/a> Schmidt confirmed that Google had been trying for some time to come to an agreement with Verizon over the definition of net neutrality<\/strong>. Then Google’s CEO said, "people get confused [about net neutrality]. What we mean is that if you have one data type, like video, you don’t discriminate against one person’s video in favor of another. It’s OK to discriminate across different types [of data]," according to the Telegraph\u2026 [emphasis added<\/em>]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <PC World<\/a>><\/p>\n

The free market is already at work on the Internet.  The service you purchase from your ISP (Internet Service Provider) guarantees a certain bandwidth (speed of data transfer).  If you want more speed available to you, you have to pay for it.  That is fair.  The service I purchase from my HSP (Hosting Service Provider) that delivers Politics Plus to you also guarantees a certain bandwidth.  If I want more, I have to pay for it.  That is fair.  That is the free market.  Net Neutrality would guarantee that the only thing that effects the speed of data transfer between Politics Plus and you is the bandwidth you and I have chosen to buy.  Does that make sense?<\/font><\/p>\n

Now, giant telecoms don\u2019t want us to have that freedom.  They want to control the speed of data transfer based on what we are doing.  Right now the argument is economic.  They claim they want to cut transfer rates for data intensive applications like file sharing.  But once they get that power, how long will it be before they start cutting transfer rated based on political content?  Considering that greedy corporations want to control what we see, hear and read, how much will they be willinbg to pay to stifle content in opposition to their agenda?  Measure the time in heartbeats.<\/font><\/p>\n

Credo Action has a petition to Google to stop dealing with Verizon under the table.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"7googleAA\" Google’s motto is "Don’t be evil," but Google is about to cut a deal with Verizon that would end the Internet as we know it.<\/p>\n

According to a front-page New York Times<\/span> story, the deal would allow "Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege."1<\/p>\n

It would create fast Internet lanes for the largest corporations and slow lanes for the rest of us.<\/p>\n

That is why CREDO is joining MoveOn, Free Press, and Color of Change in rallying Google users to tell Google, "Don’t be evil."<\/p>\n

Speak up for a free and open Internet by signing this petition. With massive amounts of public pressure, we can stop this deal.<\/p>\n

From the beginning, the Internet has been a level playing field that allows everyone to connect to one another and to the world of content available online — whether it’s Daily Kos or FOX News.<\/p>\n

This deal would change all of that by allowing Google and Verizon to pick what websites you can see over others. It would undermine the open Internet upon which hundreds of millions of people rely.<\/p>\n

Our Internet connection should be free of corporate gatekeepers — there’s only one Internet, and it shouldn’t matter who your provider is or whether you’re logging on from home or your cell phone.<\/p>\n

Sign this petition to tell Google, "Don’t be evil."<\/p>\n

Founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin created Google to make information freely available to everyone online.<\/p>\n

But this deal is a complete reversal that abandons their core principles. It’s evil and Google must walk away from it.<\/p>\n

Sign this letter and tell Google’s founders: "Your Verizon deal IS evil, and it must be stopped."<\/p>\n

1 <\/span>"Google and Verizon Near Deal on Web Pay Tiers," New York Times<\/span>, August 4, 2010<\/a> <\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

To sign the petition, click here<\/a>.  I did.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I trust you know that I am a long term advocate of Net Neutrality.  At present, it is under severe threat from corporate telecommunications giants, who may have been joined by Google, a former ally in the battle to keep the Internet open.  Here is an explanation of the issue, followed by a petition I […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2490","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","category-5-id","post-seq-1","post-parity-odd","meta-position-corners","fix"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2490","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2490"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2490\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2490"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2490"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2490"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}