Why Not Have The Government Tax Google To Pay For Next Generation Networks?
from the because-it's-idiotic? dept
For all of the bad arguments we see against network neutrality legislation, at the very least they come from a basic (if skewed) free market rationale. They very much focus on the idea of keeping the government out of the process (which is somewhat amusing when you consider how many favors, tax breaks, government-granted rights of ways and subsidies were used to get the telcos to where they are today). While it was AT&T’s Ed Whitacre who kicked off the latest round of net neutrality debates a year ago by saying that companies like Google should pay AT&T for delivering their content, at least he was talking about a private deal between two companies. More recently, the telcos have backed away from the idea that Google owes them money for a free ride, perhaps because it’s idiotically wrong and provably false. That’s resulted in some net neutrality critics saying that the telcos would never, ever block a service like Google (despite their own earlier statements).
Apparently, however, someone forgot to tell all of that to Canadian cable company Videotron, who’s chief stirred up the pot by not only suggesting that all of these internet companies are getting a free ride on his network, but tossing out all the “free market” “hands off” crap to come right out and say he thinks the government should put a “transmission tariff” on various internet service to help fund the ability for his company to build a new network. Somehow, I think Robert Depatie may have lost a bunch of support from free market think tankers on that suggestion. Of course, there is no fundamental reason for this, other than greed from a company who wants more money from the government because it’s unable or simply too lazy to build up its own business. David Canton responds to this suggestion the same way some of us suggested Google should respond to the earlier suggestions that they were getting a free ride: they should ask the telcos to pay them. After all, it’s services like Google and Apple and Amazon that make the broadband lines the telcos and cable companies provide valuable. The problem is that these telcos and cable companies think they have the power position here, when they don’t. Or, perhaps, in this case, Videotron realizes it doesn’t have the power position, which is why it’s asking for the government to step in and force Google to pay up.
Comments on “Why Not Have The Government Tax Google To Pay For Next Generation Networks?”
Google Shrugged
I can’t understand thinking like this at all. I am afraid that we are heading for a world that Ayn Rand foresaw in the 1950’s. These quotes seem to fit more and more today as we pass laws that continue to restrict our freedoms.
“You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against — then you’ll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We’re after power and we mean it. Your fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you’d better get wise to it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any overnment has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system…that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be easier to deal with.”
– Ayn Rand
“Google is Prometheus who changed his mind. After centuries of being torn by vultures in payment for having brought to men the fire of the gods, he broke his chains—and he withdrew his fire—until the day when men withdraw their vultures.”
– modified a bit from Atlas Shrugged (1957) by Ayn Rand
“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government
has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t
enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a
crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws.”
— Ayn Rand, “Atlas Shrugged”
Google Shrugged (2)
“If you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders–what would you tell him to do?”
“To shrug.”
Free Ride?
Doesn’t Google and any other entity one the net pay for access already? I am sure that the tens of thousands of servers that are providing content and crawling my webfarm are connected to at least a 56k modem (joke for those that waant to flame) or maybe an OC. They don’t pay for that access? Where is the free ride? Fuck the government and the bullshit taxation. Tax the damn Chinese imports (tarrifs of old) and stay off the populous.
Idiots
These people are idiots…. don’t they realize w/o the content LIKE GOOGLE, there would be NO NEED for their damn network. Maybe they should pay Google.
Not a Free Ride
How is it a Free Ride.. Doesn’t Google, etc.. pay for Bandwidth from these Providors? And Yes.. if it wasn’t for Services like Skype, Google, YouTube, etc.. Why would we want or need highspeed Internet. Which Oops isn’t that a Profit for some big company?
Some always wants a Free Ride or wants to try and Capitalize on someone elses coat tells.. It’s Disgusting.
Damn PIGS.
On to something
I think you’re on to something James. I think Google should call their bluff and threaten to block their services from getting to Google unless they pay a usage fee.
Re: On to something
if google called the bluff and banned those specific users they would be alienating people who took no part in this accuzation and would make hundreds of thousands of people extremmely pissed at google not thier ISP.
Analagous?
Maybe the telcos should get a cut of Domino’s pizza delivery business, too.
Fee Ride
I think this is more a political move by teleco’s to position themselves for tax breaks from the government. Google needs Att just as much as Att needs google or another network provider for that matter. Look at it from this point of view, what is the cost to build a new network for users versus the cost that Google incurs to provide a new service. Google can instantly see new revenue from its service or purchase of another site. Google also can add as manny advertisers as it wants from virtually an company in the world.Att on the other hand might see profits years after it develops and put in motion a plan to build a network and that network is only going to have a curtain amount of subscribers it can sell too.
So shouldn’t they get some sort of break? Believe me I think teleco’s are large and slow and sometimes hinder innovation, but they are staple and I like that. I don’t believe its the end of a free society like the one comment though. I just feel that both sides of the coin need to be looked at/
I thought our money that we pay for broadband was so that we can access all the mentioned services. We’re paying for broadband access after all. If they limit what we can access, what are we paying for??
Okay...
let me get this straight. The telcos accuse Google and other content providers of getting a free ride? Now I’m sure that when telcos made the contracts to transmit content on their networks the telcos work it out so that they would get paid by the content providers or are they just giving the bandwidth to them? This sounds like a simple case of the telcos wanting a bigger piece of the pie now that they that content providers can make big money. Now if the telcos weren’t so greedy they may have been able to negotiate over the contracts with the providers. But no all they want is the money, no matter who they piss off on the way to that all important bottom line.
Business...
Business only like the free market when it suits them best.
Troll
One world: Troll…
uhh, ottowa is in canada
the net neutrality debate centers on legislation in the congress here in the US.
as a matter of fact, the claims about ISP’s degrading vonage service so that people would switch to their VOIP service was in canada too.
a good half of these net neutrality concerns could probably be laid to rest by invading canada. given the behavior of the telecommunications industry, they will probably greet us as liberators.
Telcos
Most telcos claim that they really don’t make any money from transferring data, and that companies like Google are abusing the inter exchange between networks. Now of course they are making money, or else we wouldn’t see networks expanding every day and new deals for bigger better services.
The real problem is its easier for telcos to allocate their profits into expanding and bringing on more clients in at any costs and let regulation worry about keeping things operating properly.
Telcos found a way to break the rules of business by getting the favor of government. Instead of cutting operational costs, investigating new business models, cutting services that are not profitable, renegotiate contracts with other exchanges/customers, etc. like any normal business; they would much rather not have to take risks of changing prices, work things out with other networks, risk pissing off some clients, and do work. Its so much simpler lobby the government to force the clients to do the work themselves….
Basically if they want to charge people by byte transmitted, do so. If you want to charge for unlimited access to the network, do that instead. The problem is you can’t charge people for unlimited use and per byte transferred at the same time. The costs and problems of operating the network infrastructure in a profitable fashion IS the telco’s business…leave the customers and the government out of it.
Nobody cares about Quebec
Quebec is doing anything and everything it can to squeeze more money out of the federal government before it tries its treacherous and illegal attempt to split from the rest of Canada. This is (as pointed out) nothing but a money grab. The government should not only step out of the network subsidy arena, it should cut off any networks running into Quebec if they try to separate.