Well I am sad to inform that the interview with the Google Executives was a bust. All they told me was a definition of Net Neutrality and to wait and see what the FCC will do about it. I guess loose lips sink ships in this case. Maybe I will have better luck with writers about the situation and people that aren't so close to the subject matter at hand.

I was able to sweet talk my aunt into allowing me to talk to some of her Google Executive friends. Since it is the Thanksgiving Day Week, they told me to call them after the holidays. I want to ask them about the Google-Verizon Net Neutrality deal. Just want to see their insight.

After conducting my phone survey I decided to go to a Verizon phone store and see if they know anything about Net Neutrality and Google-Verizon pact. Upon arrival I was kindly greeted and asked if I needed any help. I told them I was interested in learning about the Google-Verizon pact and Net Neutrality. He said he would help me as best he could because he didn't have first hand knowledge of the situation. I loved the honesty and he knew more than the average person I surveyed on the phone. Talking to all these people is really enlightening.

Heading into the survey I thought about asking 100 people there opinion. After the first couple of calls I decided to reduce that number to 50 because of the hostility I received. It wasn't like I was impolite or anything. The questions I asked were very simple and didn't take anymore than a minute of their time. But I guess some people are just hostile.

My survey consisted of only three questions because I wanted to get a barometer of what people knew about Net Neutrality. I didn't ask heart to heart questions, they were just simple yes or no answers.

The questions are as follows.

1. Do you use the internet?

2. Do you pay for your own internet?

3. Do you know or have heard about Net Neutrality?

The results that I compiled from my 50 participants were very, very surprising. The answer to the first question was as expected with 50 YES. Hearing a NO probably would have made me ask why not. But anyways moving on. The answer to the second question was roughly 50-50, with 32 YES and 18 NO. Most of the NO's is understandable because those people didn't pay for rent so I am sure I called some teens or kids. Plus, the NO's said they use the library for their internet access. The most shocking result was the answer to my last question. Overwhelmingly the answer was NO with 46 NO and only 4 YES.

After looking at my results it kind of makes me sad that something so important is not getting to anybody in the public aka common people. This feels like a battle of the major corporations and the FCC and we are just bystanders waiting for the dust to settle.

So, today I decided to perform my survey about this topic. Instead of relying on my peers or just students from school, I want a wide range of data. Since this topic affects everybody I decided to just flip through the yellow pages and survey the people listed personally. I have unlimited weekend minutes and this was a slow weekend so why not put this time to good use. Once I am done I will let you know the results.

Wireless vs Wired

The cnet interview I posted earlier was conducted back in August of this year. A subject matter that has surfaced today that was discussed in that interview was the debate over Wireless vs Wired Internet managing. Google and Verizon agree that the Wired lines needed to be controlled or enforce but they feel like the Wireless portion needs to be excluded from any discussion. An example of that would be the now ending of unlimited data usage by the cell phone companies. Most people will only be using 2G and not 3G like so advertised. Once you go over you will be charge per amount for doing so. This is the oldest trick in the book and it makes sense now why a corporation such as Google and Verizon would ask to be regulated. It's the slight of hands trick. You concentrate on what I am doing with one hand while I do something else with my other hand.

They want Congress to put into laws for the Wired part but leave the Wireless part in the open so they can do with it as they so pleases. Kind of smart if you really think about. Sort of like a compromise of sorts. You get something and I get something out of the deal.

cnet Reporter's Roundtable continue

Oh I left something out that caught my eye on this particular subject. One of the interviewee was asked how the Internet would look if Net Neutrality is no longer there. His answer was straight to the point and made a lot of sense and did not include any hard to understand principles. Basically the Internet would look like your television system with the Cable or Satellite companies. So you would get a package that allows you to watch certain programs. If you want to watch something like HBO and didn't have that service than you would need to pay more to get that particular program. Sports fans pay extra for extra sports programming, while the normal Family man might pay more for his children to have extra cartoon programs. When you look at it this way having Net Neutrality is better than disbanding it. Can you imagine working on something and being limited to only certain things on the Internet that you can search and verify your sources? This seems like the whole gasoline problem in America. No matter how much they charge people are still willing to pay because it is a necessity for them. Remember the old classic movie slogan from Field of Dreams, "If you build it, they will come"? In this case it is, "If you charge for it, we will pay."

cnet Reporter's Roundtable

Back in August, cnet did a live interview with two writers who know a lot about Net Neutrality. This interview was conducted after the Google-Verizon proposal went public. Among the topics covered during the interview included Net Neutrality, Google-Verizon proposal explained, Comcast case, and a prediction of the future of the Internet.

Several details in this interview caught my attention. For starters Google and Verizon does not believe that the FCC is not the answer. They want Congress to step in and make their proposal law which helps alleviate the problem when talking about wired Internet access. The second was that the FCC and the Google-Verizon proposal are near similar with a few modifications here and there. The last thing was that we, the US, are the only country in discussion about this problem. I found in weird that everyone is waiting for us to make a decision and then they will move on from there.

The Proposal (FCC 2009)

FCC chief proposes new Net neutrality rules

Last September, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski laid out his plans for the Internet and Net Neutrality. They work off of the existing principles and adds a few more that the Chairman wanted.

The existing principles can be summarized this way: Network operators cannot prevent users from accessing lawful Internet content, applications, and services of their choice, nor can they prohibit users from attaching non-harmful devices to the network.

Now Genachowski is proposing two new principles. The first would prevent Internet access providers from discriminating against particular Internet content or applications, while allowing for reasonable network management. The second principle would ensure that Internet access providers are transparent about the network management practices they implement.

Genachowski also made it clear that the Net neutrality rules he plans to make regulation will be applied to wireless provider, too.

So as of 2009, Genachowski will not be exempting the Wireless and treating everything the same.

The Plan (GnV)

According to the guardian.co.uk the following is the Google and Verizon proposal for Net Neutrality.

• ISPs cannot discriminate against any service in an anti-competitive way.
• ISPs cannot block consumers from any legal service.
• ISPs have the right to manage and prioritise web traffic.
• ISPs must be transparent about how they are managing services.
• The FCC would enforce on a case-by-case basis, and have its regulatory powers over broadband services restored.
• A fixed part of all phone fees would be dedicated to investment in broadband networks.

And the last and most significant two:

• ISPs can introduce new and different internet services, such as 3D.
• Wireless services are exempt from all these proposals, apart from the condition of transparency.

The main point I believe is the very last statement. They want wireless to be exempt because everyone is now converting to wireless and leaving the desktop behind. Mobility is the key component in all of this. Verizon knows that there is money to be had in the Wireless/Mobility aspect so they are willing to give up the Wired aspect. Gotta say it is a pretty smart idea. If the FCC exempts Wireless from its Net Neutrality proposal or plans this could be a problem.

Those Against Net Neutrality And Those For Net Neutrality

Google, Verizon and net neutrality: what does it mean?

Those who are against Net Neutrality are the big corporations who are trying to make money out of this whole providing service deal, such as Verizon and AT&T. Basically all the big telecoms in the US. And those who are against it should be practically everyone because its open and free at the moment.

An interesting argument against Net Neutrality comes from David Farber.

"An updated internet could offer a wide range of new and improved services," he told the Washington Post in 2008. "including better security against viruses, worms, denial-of-service attacks and zombie computers; services that require high levels of reliability, such as medical monitoring; and those that cannot tolerate network delays, such as voice and streaming video. To provide these services, both the architecture of the Internet and the business models through which services are delivered will probably have to change."

However, Tim Berners-Lee states:

"Control of information is hugely powerful. In the US, the threat is that companies can control what I access for commercial reasons. In China, companies could control what users access for political reasons. Freedom of connection with any application to any party is the fundamental social basis of the internet."

To step back at look at it from both sides everything really makes sense. Controlling of information does mean you have power, just look at the Nazi Propaganda back in history. But then again having growth is what we are all about in the US. If something is stunting our growth we need to fix the problem and advance on from there. I guess at the end of the day we just have to find a way to compromise between the two situations.

What I Learned So Far

So with such a huge topic like this I decided to do some research on the subject matter. Net Neutrality debate isn't something new and has actually been on going for several years now. Net Neutrality as defined by Wikipedia, is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions by Internet service providers and governments on content, sites, platforms, the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and the modes of communication. From what I get gather it means that everything is open. You can do so with the Internet as you so chooses. The ISPs do not restrict or block any content you so wish to look at. However, everything started circulating when Comcast decided to block its peer-to-peer applications fall of last year. Once this began everything started to spiral out of control. Comcast says the FCC has no authority is this subject matter and that since they pay for their lines shouldn't they have the right to restrict anything that they feel that they don't want to provide.

Just be reading some of the first articles this is a very interesting topic. A lot of he say she say so far. And of course like every situations there are going to be pros and cons. Can't wait to explore them.

The reason why I am exploring this topic is due to a segment I saw on Attack of the Show. It caught my eye and was the first time that I was introduced to Net Neutrality. For something that has a huge affect on everybody I was surprised it had very little play in the media realm.

Hey everybody. I created this blog to talk about a research project I have for my class. It is like an open forum so if you have any comments or anything feel free to contribute. My project focuses on Net Neutrality and it's future. The reason why I want to look at this proposal is because of the major effects it has on our community and our future. Everyone uses the internet now a days and this topic is going to touch everybody. Thanks for helping me out.