Google:
MYTH: Google has “sold out” on network neutrality.
FACT: …With that in mind, we decided to partner with a major broadband provider on the best policy solution we could devise together. We’re not saying this solution is perfect, but we believe that a proposal that locks in key enforceable protections for consumers is preferable to no protection at all.
Google’s Original Stance (2007):
The nation’s spectrum airwaves are not the birthright of any one company. They are a unique and valuable public resource that belong to all Americans. The FCC’s auction rules are designed to allow U.S. consumers — for the first time — to use their handsets with any network they desire, and download and use the lawful software applications of their choice.
It’s regrettable that Verizon has decided to use the court system to try to prevent consumers from having any choice of innovative services. Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics.
That looks like selling out to me.
Google:
MYTH: This proposal represents a step backwards for the open Internet.
It changes nothing, in reality. Though it certainly allows for a lot of work arounds, many of which Google is conveniently forgetting about in this blog post.
Google:
MYTH: This proposal would eliminate network neutrality over wireless.
FACT: It’s true that Google previously has advocated for certain openness safeguards to be applied in a similar fashion to what would be applied to wireline services. However, in the spirit of compromise, we have agreed to a proposal that allows this market to remain free from regulation for now, while Congress keeps a watchful eye.
So really that is not a Myth then, it does eliminate that and they are only defending it by saying the free market will correct itself. Except according to Google’s 2007 blog post (linked to above) that is not the case:
Apparently, one of the nation’s major existing wireless carriers doesn’t think consumers deserve more choices.
Earlier this week, Verizon Wireless filed a lawsuit against the FCC’s rules that would require the eventual winner of the spectrum offer open devices and applications. They called the rules “arbitrary and capricious, unsupported by substantial evidence and otherwise contrary to law.”
Google:
MYTH: Google is working with Verizon on this because of Android.
Why are they even bothering to lie about this one???
This is the most pathetic excuse for defending your actions I have ever seen. So much so that I am moving our corporate email from Google apps and I urge you to do the same. Pathetic Google.