dslreports logo
 story category
Google: Neutrality's Great, But Competition Is Where It's At
As we've long noted, you wouldn't need net neutrality rules if we saw greater broadband competition, as the former is just a symptom of the latter. And nobody knows more about the lack of competition than Google Fiber's Milo Medin, whose service has companies like AT&T and Time Warner Cable scurrying to compete (or at least scurrying to give the impression they're competing). While Medin says Google was pleased with the FCC's recent neutrality ruling, he also told attendees of a recent conference it's competition that really fixes the industry:
quote:
Click for full size
"Some would argue that regulation is the answer, but I have never seen a company deliver better service because a federal rule existed that said they must," Medin said. "What we do need to do is build new networks and deliver better and faster services while offering consumers new choice that replaces bandwidth scarcity with bandwidth abundance."
Of course Medin then immediately proceeds to note that by reclassifying ISPs as common carriers, it gave Google mandated access to utility poles, something Google had argued for previously:
quote:
"Until recently none of us had any right to get on a pole because the FCC only granted pole attachment rights only to telephone companies and cable operators, but in the process of reclassifying broadband Internet service as a common carrier service they extended pole attachment rights to all Internet service providers," Medin said. "That's a great first step I'd like to commend the commission for addressing, but we still need more details on how this is going to be applied."
Of course how we're supposed to bring this competition to bear is another conversation entirely, especially as AT&T and Verizon back away from millions of fixed-line customers. Despite endless media coverage, Google's bottomless pockets and lobbying power, they're only live in parts of two markets (Provo & Kansas City). That's why in addition to recently bumping the broadband definition to 25 Mbps and passing net neutrality rules, the FCC recently took aim at eliminating state protectionist laws ISPs have helped erect that prohibit towns and cities from wiring themselves when nobody else will.

Most recommended from 41 comments


ohreally
join:2014-11-21

2 recommendations

ohreally

Member

I agree with Google

for once.

I'm not sure that Google's brand of competition is the right way to do it though. LLU and infrastructure sharing would have much more of an effect than an overbuilder cherry picking certain bits of certain cities and demanding that local governments bend over to get them to consider them.

I'd rather have a choice of 20+ companies, not two (which may become one if Google were to become the only serious option), and I'd choose my ISP on far more than just raw speed. I want static IPs, I want no port blocks, I want to be able to use my own equipment, I want excellent customer service, and I'll take lower speeds to get that.

At the risk of annoying a certain member on here, I actually do live in a country with real infrastructure sharing, and it is fantastic. I don't get gigabit internet, but I do get everything else.