Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Verizon DOESN'T want to end "Google's Free Lunch"?

Feb 17, 2006 10:34AM PST

Found this on digg, here:
http://tinyurl.com/9pn5y

If you click through, you go to a letter from Verizon, here:
http://se7enpc.com/

Apparently Verizon is claiming that they fully support network neutrality.

I find myself questioning the legitimacy a bit, but sure hope it's true.

-Ryan

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Isn't this ...
Feb 17, 2006 11:25AM PST

... a COMPLETE 180 from what they have said before??

I'm confuzzled .. My poor brain.

- Collapse -
It's not so much a 180, as much as a misunderstanding
Feb 17, 2006 11:33AM PST

"...in this case, John [Thorne] was quoted on an issue where someone else -- Verizon's Tom Tauke -- is really the spokesman. Tom is Verizon's executive vice president for public affairs, policy and communication; John is a senior attorney who works in our legal department and, literally, wrote the book on the 1996 Telecommunications Act."

Basically, a guy said something stupid on a subject he isn't in control of at all.

-Ryan

- Collapse -
Ahhhhh ...
Feb 17, 2006 11:39AM PST

Ain't that like an attorney to talk about stuff they don't know anything about?

Hope there aren't any attorneys out here ... If there are, I wasn't talking about you; I meant the other ones. Happy

- Collapse -
FUD
Feb 17, 2006 1:54PM PST

I call FUD on this.

This is just my interpretation right now, and I haven't read the conference call transcript but...

"...in this case, John [Thorne] was quoted on an issue where someone else -- Verizon's Tom Tauke -- is really the spokesman."

TRANSLATION: We don't like how people reacted to what John said, so don't believe him.

"Tom is Verizon's executive vice president for public affairs, policy and communication."

TRANSLATION: Tom is our head PR flack, and much better at dealing with the media. We wish he would have been quoted because he was able to spin this issue in our favour.

"John is a senior attorney who works in our legal department and, literally, wrote the book on the 1996 Telecommunications Act."

TRANSCRIPT: John is a legal expert, and how much would a legal expert be expected to know about telecommunications law. Now please go read what our head PR flak had to say to make you feel better.

- Collapse -
Yeah, I understand
Feb 17, 2006 2:01PM PST

I'm still skeptical, but remaining optimistic.
In case you still haven't gone through the transcript, the part you probably want to read is about 1/3 of the way down, (the 6 paragraphs) right above the Q&A.

-Ryan

- Collapse -
These guys are good!
Feb 17, 2006 2:30PM PST

It took me awhile to figure out what was going on. They're trying to redefine the Internet! This is brilliant. So Verizon provides the INternet but that's just a subset of their services. Using the same back bone, and all the same pipes they also provide their video, but they call that a separate service, so that doesn't count. And then they offer to sell that kind of service to others. But that isn't part of the INternet, it's more like VPN. So when Verizon says it supports network neutrality, it means for the part of the backbone that it decides is the Internet, but not for the part that it decides is for its special service.

This amounts to the same thing. If you pay Verizon more, they're going to deliver your content faster, they just don't call it the Internet. Clever. Here's the quote:

"Let me try to address that issue. If, let's say, we offer somebody 5 megabits of Internet access and they purchase that 5 megabits of capacity, over the same type that comes into the home, we will be offering them video services. The video services are not part of the Internet access 5 megabits. And so we think that as you ? as you offer this capacity to consumers that gives them full access to the Internet, you also ought to be able to do other things.

Now, in the future ? we don't have anything like this now, but in the future if we have these 5 megabits or 15 megabits for Internet access and we have the video services on the pipe coming into the home, it may also be that someone will want to offer another service that we don't necessarily envision. "

From http://se7enpc.com/transcript.htm

- Collapse -
Wow
Feb 17, 2006 2:36PM PST

I never would've picked up on that on my own. Of course, it would help if I did more than skim the whole thing.

Good job, Tom.

-Ryan

- Collapse -
A Site that calls ******...
Feb 17, 2006 2:20PM PST

It would be nice if there existed a website that deconstructs stuff that is said after the fact by spin doctors and compares that with what was really said in the first place. Then visitors could place a vote as to whether or not they believe it or think it is pure snizz.

On this one, I vote snizz.

-Kevin S.

- Collapse -
FUD?
Feb 17, 2006 2:30PM PST

I must be seriously lacking in my knowledge of acronyms. Tom, can you shed some light for me?

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
Feb 17, 2006 2:32PM PST
- Collapse -
Thanks
Feb 17, 2006 2:35PM PST

My mind must be in the gutter this evening, as I was thinking that the F and U stood for something MUCH different .. Happy

- Collapse -
Sorry for the jargonish
Feb 17, 2006 2:35PM PST

FUD=Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.

Used to describe people raising alarm or fogging the issue. General reserved for marketing ploys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FUD

- Collapse -
Thanks Tom!
Feb 17, 2006 2:39PM PST

Guess I should use the 'Net for more than BOL forums, newsvine, digg, and podcasts .. Wink