I’ve had a couple of days to digest the Google-Verizon “proposal” and now that I have calmed down a bit, I’m  started to put this whole thing in the its proper perspective and context. First, it’s just a proposal and carry no weight of law or legislation. Sure, a future congress or FCC could use it as a starting point for future legislation, but this issue (if ever taken up by the congress) will become much more diluted, convoluted and contentious before this ever becomes policy.  Those of you who think that Google just sold-out the entire internet your only half right. After many years of lobbying, battles, protests and court cases the ISP’s have essentially relented on control of their wireline assets. That argument has been won. In the end the data caps will rise and eventually disappear along with its iron grip on the internet backbone.  All-in-all the backbone of the internet will remain relatively traffic agnostic going forward – at least in principle. Wireless on the other hand is different. The Telcos had little standing in controlling the content flowing over networks seeing as that very network was partially government funded.  But to my limited knowledge the wireless networks were build mainly with private funding by dozens of carrier (most of which now comprise of the big 4) . They raised the capital to purchase (no lease) spectrum from the government and build out advanced wireless networks using that spectrum.  They have the right to do with those networks as they see fit. Sucks I know, but think about it on a more pico-scale. You build a $500 dollar Wi-Fi network for your house to extend your backbone. You manage traffic on it so that your XBox gets priority to stream Netflix over your iPad surfing the web. You enable encryption and MAC address filtering for only the devices in your house. You have that right. Why? You invested in the network infrastructure from the ingress point where the ISP delivers the bits, to the Wi-Fi access points, wireless extenders and antennas you installed.  Even if you you don’t lock down your network and allow anyone to access it in your neighborhood, if you were to find that your generosity was being abused you have the right (and duty) to regulate or eliminate that traffic. I know I am comparing apples and oranges, but the extrapolated premise still stands.  So you probably won’t like hearing this, but part of being an adult is living in the real world. AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint, MetroPCS, etc have every right to do with their respective networks what they DAMN WELL PLEASE.  Is this consumer friendly? HELL NO!! It’s just the reality of the landscape today. It won’t always be like this, but for now it is.  Give the carriers time to build out their networks and make their money. I predict that this may be a non-issue soon anyway. Soon most of the customers on wireless network won’t be people with smart devices, but simple devices such as gas or electric meters and other type sensors(an Internet of Things). These networks are expensive to deploy and even more expensive to maintain. Let’s marvel at the now and not the post-apocalyptic, non-net neutral future that every tech pundits is prognosticating. For Christ sakes, we’re driving down the freeways at 85 MPH listening to streaming internet radio while getting email and real-time traffic updates. How cool is that?  Let’s keep the anti-BIG business rhetoric to minimum.  We’ve come a long way since the days of WAP and ATT.Net. We’re winning the argument for a more neutral internet ever so slowly.
Image copyright Grassmere Animal Hospital