You are here Dismantling Google's reasons why NN should not apply to them
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-05-16 18:14
I was able to ask the only question from the audience of the Educause net neutrality panel today.
Mr. Whit's first weak line of defense was that the term is really "network" neutrality implying it was not about "Internet" neutrality.
-
-
" Guide to Net Neutrality for Google Users
"Net neutrality" is an issue that will shape the future of the Internet.
What is Net Neutrality?
Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet. The Internet has operated according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days."
-
Mr. Whit it appears your company thinks "net neutrality" is about the Internet, not just broadband networks.
It is also a joke for Google to act like it is not a network company!
-
Google has assembled the largest "network" of grid computing in the world! What do you think connects Google's million plus servers together?
-
Why should Google's "network" be free of regulation, when every other similar "network" would be regulated?
Mr. Whit's second weak line of defense was saying that there is only cable and telecom competition (duopoly), ridiculing BPL and other alternative technologies, and said in contrast that there were "hundreds of search engines."
-
The facts, tell a different story Mr. Whit.
-
-
My point Mr Whit, is that the core facts that antitrust authorities measure, the US search business is more concentrated and getting more so in comparison to the broadband market, which is 42% less concentrated than search and it is becoming less concentrated each day.
-
My further point here, is if market concentration of broadband access technologies is concentrated enough that you believe net regulation is necessary, why should it not apply to Internet access technologies like search which are even more concentrated, than broadband?
Mr Whit's third weak line of defense is saying entry barriers for search are low.
-
Excuse me?
-
While it may be easy and cheap to declare yourself a search engine on the web, it is another to be able to enter and compete with the scale necessary to take share from Google.
-
"Little" companies like Microsoft and Yahoo can't.
-
Despite Google's spin, new entrants are no threat to Google because they have no "network effects" and Google does.
-
New entrants can't afford the multi-billions of dollars to build a grid computer network of over a million servers to compete with Google.
-
New entrants can't afford the hundreds of millions of dollars of investment to scrape and cache a similar amount of searchable info as Google.
-
New entrants can't finagle or afford to pay MySpace or AOL billion dollar deals to become the exclusive search engine for that audience.
-
Google's spin for the masses may work, but it doesn't wash with anyone who is sophisticated about competition or antitrust.
Bottomline: Google is proposing ruinous regulation for their biggest potential competitors, and want to be immune even though Google's competitive situation is more concentrated than broadband.
»
|