Now That It’s in the Broadband Game, Google Flip-Flops on Network Neutrality

[onehandle]

Source: Wired

In a dramatic about-face on a key internet issue yesterday, Google told the FCC that the network neutrality rules Google once championed don’t give citizens the right to run servers on their home broadband connections, and that the Google Fiber network is perfectly within its rights to prohibit customers from attaching the legal devices of their choice to its network.

At issue is Google Fiber’s Terms of Service, which contains a broad prohibition against customers attaching “servers” to its ultrafast 1 Gbps network in Kansas City.

Google wants to ban the use of servers because it plans to offer a business class offering in the future. A potential customer, Douglas McClendon, filed a complaint against the policy in 2012 with the FCC, which eventually ordered Google to explain its reasoning by July 29.

In its response, Google defended its sweeping ban by citing the very ISPs it opposed through the years-long fight for rules that require broadband providers to treat all packets equally.

Read more: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/07/google-neutrality

---

'DON'T BE EVIL'

...unless it affects our bottom line.

[Hydra]

1. It's all about the money

I always knew their support of various issues was directed to a monetary end. Here it is in black and white.

[JimDandy]

3. And Control of Information.

Want to get files off your home computer from your work computer? That's a server-Google won't allow it...

Check your nanny cam to make sure your children are safe at home? That's a server-Google won't allow it...

[JimDandy]

2. Just one more link in the chain

to keep the lower and middle class people and small businesses firmly within the grips of corporations. A personal server gives people and businesses the ability to communicate independently to their targeted audiences and to keep files and documents available to their customers/volunteer activists 24/7. In addition, denying us the use of personal servers forces us to not just give up our private personal and/or financial business data to third parties like google, but to pay for that creepy "privilege".

One more 'Google-Grab'.

[bemildred]

4. Screw Google, they became evil. nt

[geomon666]

5. This is why you don't trust corporation for anything.

Not even to tell you what color the sky is.

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, onehandle.

[ChromeFoundry]

7. It doesn't read like that at all...

"Our Terms of Service prohibit running a server. However, use of applications such as multi-player gaming, video-conferencing, home security and others which may include server capabilities but are being used for legal and non-commercial purposes are acceptable and encouraged."

This is worded so that businesses subscribe to a business-level account, including static IP Addresses, and higher redundancy for fault... So that users cannot sue Google for loss of revenue because someone with a backhoe dug through a buried fiber optic cable.

Shall we now talk about the Apps that Apple has removed from the Apple Store because they are planning a competitive product? *crickets*

[joshcryer]

8. They want to ban commercial services on personal accounts.

As opposed to business accounts.

Sounds about right.

But this is definitely a flip-flop since Google did argue that all clients are servers.

They need to just throw a bandwidth hog clause in there. No one would dispute it.

You could run DU off of a Google Fiber connection. Quite literally.

It doesn't help that they got in bed with Verizon awhile back.

It's definitely about the bottom line. I don't see why they can't be up front and reasonable about it. If you want a 1GBPS connection and want to run a business on it, then, have at it. If you're downloading 1TP a damn day (easily done on said connection), that's 30 TB a month. That's a high level venture capitalist website. That's 15x the bandwidth you would get at a high quality server for $500 a month. From my point of view someone who wants to do that doesn't view the internet as a commons but as their personal playground / money making venture.

[on point]

9. We need vertical integration ban. You can be a carrier or content provider not both

That makes arrears compete on quality price and features, makes content providers compete on content, and those with poor quality will die hopefully

[nebenaube]

10. Fios won't let you either... n/t