[LINK] Net neutrality, goo, and dribble

[rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au]

Linkers,

While I'm accustomed to good sense going out the window when there's a 
political debate about the Internet to be had, where on Earth does the 
idea that Google gets "free bandwidth" come from?

Eg:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.internet27jul27,0,6525204.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines
"The "neutral" proposal that companies like Google are touting will 
ensure that they never have to pay a dime no matter how much bandwidth 
they use".

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060611-094356-1641r.htm
"Google and Amazon just want to continue their free ride."

And
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/tech/article/0,2777,DRMN_23910_4881952,00.html

> In one recent paper, Gifford wrote an imaginary "tollbooth" 
> conversation in which a telco executive asks Google what it will pay 
> for its traffic to be carried.
>
> Google CEO: "That's funny, I was just going to call and ask you how 
> much you were going to pay me to allow my wildly popular bits to grace 
> your network."
>
> Broadband CEO: "Wha(t)? You should be paying me."
>
> Google CEO: "Excuse me, I need to get the other line to ink the Google 
> broadband package with your competitor."
>
> Broadband CEO: "Zero sounds like a great price."
>
Now, it's bad enough that this idea is considered to be a viable 
lobbying stance - Google pays for its pipes just like anybody buying 
data centre-scale access pays - but where did the lobotomised press get 
the idea that Google has free bandwidth? If you want to, you could 
always look at Google's telco costs in its SEC filings ...

RC