p2pnet - rss feed: Google the ‘freeloader’
p2p news / p2pnet: Google is freeloading - getting into people’s homes by, “using a network of lines and cables the phone company spent billions of dollars to build,” says Verizon senior vp and deputy general John Thorne.
His remark came as lawmakers prepared to debate legislation that could let phone and cable companies charge Internet firms additional fees for using their high-speed lines, says the Washington Post, going on:
“Online search engine leader Google Inc. is wedding its instant messaging and e-mail services in the same Web browser, hoping the convenience will lure users from the larger communications networks operated by its chief rivals.
But, “The network builders are spending a fortune constructing and maintaining the networks that Google intends to ride on with nothing but cheap servers,” Thorne told a conference, according to the story. “It is enjoying a free lunch that should, by any rational account, be the lunch of the facilities providers.”
Google, Yahoo and other such Net services should pay for “preferred access to consumers over such lines,” says Verizon, which is, “spending billions of dollars to construct a fiber-optic network around the country for delivering high-speed Internet and cable TV services”.
Thorne, “spoke as Congress is considering whether to write provisions that advocates say would ensure consumers unfettered access to the Internet,” says the Washington Post.
“The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing today on the issue, which is known as net neutrality.
“Opponents have argued that there is no need for such laws because there have been few instances of network providers blocking Web sites; because their customers would not stand for such limitations; and because, as a general rule, regulation of the Internet should be avoided.”
Also See:
Washington Post - Verizon Executive Calls for End to Google’s ‘Free Lunch’, February 7, 2006
February 8th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
idiot
February 8th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
Reminds me of an old James Coburn movie “The Presidents Analyst” where the super villian turns out to be the phone company.
February 8th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
>>Google, Yahoo and other such Net services should pay for “preferred >>access to consumers over such lines,” says Verizon, which is, >>”spending billions of dollars to construct a fiber-optic network around >>the country for delivering high-speed Internet and cable TV services”.
These companies create the demand for Verizon’s products. This is nothing more than bottom line envy.
If Verizon wants a piece of the google pie they should buy stock in the company.
February 8th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Excuse me but aren’t the customers paying for access to google’s content? You can’t get paid twice, you either have to charge the companies or the customers, not both!
February 8th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
How fucking stupid could these execs get?
Google pays for multiple gigabit transit connections to multiple ISPs, they pay out HUGE every month. Just like everyone else in the business. I fail to see how they are free-riding.
Everyone and everything that connects to the internet has to PAY an ISP to get that connection, and then that ISP buys a connection from a tier-1 or 2 access provider. NOBODY IS FREERIDING.
These people need to either get a clue or get the fuck out of the internet backbone game and let the real companies take over, like Cogent and WCG and all the real companies that are more than just glorified cell-phone salesmen.
Of course, since this exec is trying to argue his false logic to congress, which currently consists of some of the biggest intellectual cowards and half-wits ever to be put into office, I’m sure these ridiculous arguments will find an audience.
The whole thing reeks of simple profit-envy among the suits.
February 8th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
I guess that $40 I just sent to the cable company wasn’t lunch enough for the providers.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
This makes about as much sense as the record companys believing they are entitled to a share of iPod player sales. If mean spirited corporate greed was water it would be time to start building an ark.
February 9th, 2006 at 1:46 am
Maybe another move by Google makes more sense now. Another article in the past mentioned that Google was considering buying up the dark fibre. That fibre laid previously that isn’t now in use and didn’t pay off for the owners financing those laying down projects. I would say to those such as Verizon to be very careful what they are asking for or they may find themselves on the recieving end of paying yet more to access Googles’ property rather than the other way around. I would suspect that if that came to be those same ones crying over what is going through their lines would be again crying foul.
February 9th, 2006 at 2:43 am
It’s good that Verizon sent a person to make the case for the company’s openly greedy mindset, so that will encourage the lawmakers to pass a network neutrality law rather than leaving it up to market forces.
February 9th, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Oh, come on.
If a network provider wants to recap on their investment, then they should charge their subscribers, not the service providers who have nothing to do with them. Would it be fair if Microsoft had to pay Verizon for access to their subscribers if their ISP is Level 3?
No, it’s not.
Let the subscribers, webhosting services, and websites pay their own providers for access, just like it is now. I run a website myself, and I cannot afford to pay every single ISP out there for access to their network. This means that if network neutrality laws are not enacted, then small people like me will be locked out of the internet.
February 9th, 2006 at 2:15 pm
> If Verizon wants a piece of the google pie they should buy stock in the company.
The problem with that is that Google stock hasn’t been doing too well lately.
February 9th, 2006 at 5:46 pm
Hey…I can’t fix every dumb mistake verizon makes.
February 9th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
I think market forces have worked out very well.
This is one case where I don’t see a problem.
My access to the internet costs more than my web site.
Both I think are bargain.
If there is a problem…I’d like to see the least amount of tinkering by people in washington. Considering how many are under investigation we can only assume the answer will come from the highest bidder / briber.