Google makes much of its corporate mantra, "Do no evil," but has been repeatedly accused of violating this motto over the past few years. Revelations of its dealings with ISPs, however, are the clearest violation of its stated values we've seen yet.
Despite having publicly fought for the principle of
network neutrality, it appears that behind closed doors, opinions at Google have shifted. According to documents obtained by the Wall Street Journal, the search giant has been involved in talks with providers to give Google content a "fast lane" to users.
Striking a deal for preferential treatment by network operators would be diametrically opposed to the notion of a open network in which all traffic is treated the same, regardless of the type and origin.
If the memos turn out to be authentic, Google would not be the first major net-neutrality backer to pull a 180.
Amazon,
Microsoft, and
Yahoo, were all members of a high profile coalition of content providers who argued for net-neutrality along with Google. All three have since been accused of violating those principles or have publicly left the coalition and altered their stance on the issue. Amazon struck a deal with
Sprint to provide faster download speeds for their
Kindle e-book reader, while Microsoft and Yahoo! both struck deals with
AT&T for software and content.
On its public policy blog,
Google defended its record, and argued that the Wall Street Journal was confused about the nature of the arrangement. The company was offering to
allocate servers that stored data such as
YouTube videos in order to provide faster access for consumers and reduce the load on the Internet backbone. It did not seek preferential treatment for its data on the network, however.
The post contends that this set-up, also known as
edge caching, is not a violation of net neutrality principles because it does not seek preferential treatment for Google content or block other providers from making similar deals.
If you ask us this, certainly falls into a gray area. While not a clear violation of net neutrality principles, it does give a specific leg up to Google-based traffic, even if not through the manipulation of packet priority and service tiers.
We wouldn't qualify this as a full about face from the search giant, we are a little surprised by its willingness to bend its own rules. This doesn't mean net neutrality is dead in the water, we, the public just need to be more vocal and diligent in our defense of a free and open Internet. [From:
Wall Street Journal]
It's hard to believe that just 40 years ago, the 
_thumbnail.jpg "Vintage Keyboards")
