So Google and Verizon went public today with their "policy framework" -- better known as the pact to end the Internet as we know it.
News of this deal broke this week, sparking a public outcry that's seen hundreds of thousands of Internet users calling on Google to live up to its "Don't Be Evil" pledge.
But cut through the platitudes the two companies (Googizon, anyone?) offered on today's press call, and you'll find this deal is even worse than advertised.
The proposal is one massive loophole that sets the stage for the corporate takeover of the Internet.
Real Net Neutrality means that Internet service providers can't discriminate between different kinds of online content and applications. It guarantees a level playing field for all Web sites and Internet technologies. It's what makes sure the next Google, out there in a garage somewhere, has just as good a chance as any giant corporate behemoth to find its audience and thrive online.
What Google and Verizon are proposing is fake Net Neutrality. You can read their framework for yourself here or go here to see Google twisting itself in knots about this suddenly "thorny issue." But here are the basics of what the two companies are proposing:
1. Under their proposal, there would be no Net Neutrality on wireless networks -- meaning anything goes, from blocking websites and applications to pay-for-priority treatment.
2. Their proposed standard for "non-discrimination" on wired networks is so weak that actions like Comcast's widely denounced blocking of BitTorrent would be allowed.
3. The deal would let ISPs like Verizon -- instead of Internet users like you -- decide which applications deserve the best quality of service. That's not the way the Internet has ever worked, and it threatens to close the door on tomorrow's innovative applications. (If RealPlayer had been favored a few years ago, would we ever have gotten YouTube?)
4. The deal would allow ISPs to effectively split the Internet into "two pipes" -- one of which would be reserved for "managed services," a pay-for-play platform for content and applications. This is the proverbial toll road on the information superhighway, a fast lane reserved for the select few, while the rest of us are stuck on the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road.
5. The pact proposes to turn the Federal Communications Commission into a toothless watchdog, left fruitlessly chasing consumer complaints but unable to make rules of its own. Instead, it would leave it up to unaccountable (and almost surely industry-controlled) third parties to decide what the rules should be.
If there's a silver lining in this whole fiasco it's that, last I checked anyway, it wasn't up to Google and Verizon to write the rules. That's why we have Congress and the FCC.
Certainly by now we should have learned -- from AIG, Massey Energy, BP, you name it -- what happens when we let big companies regulate themselves or hope they'll do the right thing.
We need the FCC -- with the backing of Congress and President Obama -- to step and do the hard work of governing. That means restoring the FCC's authority to protect Internet users and safeguarding real Net Neutrality once and for all.
Such a move might not be popular on Wall Street or even in certain corners of Silicon Valley, but it's the kind of leadership the public needs right now.
If you haven't yet told the FCC why we need Net Neutrality, please do it now.
Follow Craig Aaron on Twitter: www.twitter.com/notaaroncraig
Loading comments… 
http://www
by Scott Thill
"...If we wake up one day to an Internet that has a carpool lane for the upper class, it's worth thinking about the alternativ
The firestorm over tech giant Google and telco titan Verizon's self-inter
http://www
Isn't "capitalis
So in a year or two the special propaganda will come to us faster than the regular propaganda and a after that we can just stand in front of our telesceens along with Winston and be goodthinke
The whole idea of sharing will be over as an open forum within a decade unless we fight to keep what's been created so far. Why? Once they start down this road it can't be stopped. Or haven't we learned from history?
If you don't use Verizon wireless THIS DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.
Don't like it? Don't buy Verizon wireless, let them know why you will not buy it.
This in no way affects you if you do not use Verizon wireless. So don't.
I assume all corporate wireless providers will also support it.
If there are any true progressiv
We pay for the access, and there are ads everywhere for everything
They could get rich enough, without turning into the informatio
I actually like the idea. It's a lot like premium cable. You've got the regular stuff (what we have now), as well as some extra stuff that ISP's can offer you for an additional fee.
This means that stuff like Hulu, etc. can go into that extra special stuff. Or HBO can offer live HD streaming and comments, or even interactiv
Some people are saying it's bad because only those who can pay get to play, but I disagree. What it does is it allows online content creators to actually make some money. That's a good thing. If content is hot, ISP's would pay the rights-hol
The biggest problem the online industry has right now is monetizing
Look at the Apple iTunes store. That's what "additiona
Charging for "part" of the internet would be like Colorado and Wyoming charging to drive through their state, you could probably live with it but it would be really inconvenie
Or better yet California and Florida charging all the people going to Disney, Universal, etc. because they are popular attraction
Any way you cut it these are bad plans...
There is an easy fix for the FCC, just make a law that says no ISP may change the priority, port, packets, or flow of data of customers, end users, or competing ISPs, in any negatively impacting or detrimenta
Are you aware of what state taxes add to the price of those tickets? Hotel taxes? If you think the states aren't charging you to visit those attraction