Both Verizon and Google this morning are busily engaged in damage control over leaks indicating the two companies have struck a closed-door network neutrality agreement. Verizon is blogging that their closed-door ten month negotiations with Google are about "openness and accountability." Google meanwhile isn't denying an agreement, but they are denying that they've agreed to pay Verizon for prioritization of content -- something suggested in articles by the New York Times, who probably didn't understand what their source was telling them:As we noted this morning, Google suddenly agreeing to "pay more to ride Verizon's pipes" (as AT&T's ex-CEO phrased it back in 2005) didn't make sense. What does appear to be happening here is Verizon and Google are trying to protect revenues by crafting voluntary, self-regulatory rules that will pre-empt tougher government rules. The talks between the two companies also likely involve co-support for equally toothless, self-regulatory privacy policies aimed at pre-empting tough new federal privacy laws.

That's not exactly Google suddenly "becoming evil," but in line with their joint op/ed with Verizon back in March, it is an indication that Google is starting to do what Verizon is telling them to do. Why? How much do you think Google's Android Verizon relationship is worth? Enough for Google to ignore some of their previous principles? It's clear that as Google grows, it's shifting from innovation to turf protection, and is willing to use Verizon-style tactics (and disingenuous whining about government regulation) to do so.

And again, the broadband sector might just be fine without network neutrality rules if there were competition allowing consumers to leave an ISP should it engage in bad behavior. But given most users have the choice of only one or two carriers, and the FCC seems completely unwilling to tackle competition, these kind of back room self-regulatory agreements have virtually no value to consumers.