Given he helped write it, it's not too surprising to see Verizon's top lobbying and policy guru Tom Tauke reacting poorly to criticism that his company's net neutrality deal with Verizon is an
empty shell, designed to pre-empt real network neutrality rules. According to Tauke, the proposal is "much tougher than any nondiscrimination proposal that had ever been put on the table publicly before." That's not saying much, given previous proposals were just as weak as Verizon's (and weren't actual law either). Tauke also insists that not having rules protecting wireless is ok, given there are
already rules on the books:
Tauke said that the controversy stirred by the proposal's treatment of wireless networks has been "a little ironic, because there is only one company in the U.S. that has a requirement for open access as a wireless entity, and that of course is Verizon." Verizon bid for and won a chunk of valuable wireless spectrum in 2008 that came with so-called open access rules, requiring that the airwaves remain open to a wide array of devices and applications provided by companies other than the airwaves' owner.
Verizon enjoys bringing up the 700MHz open access conditions as an example of why wireless consumer protections aren't needed, but they don't bother to note that the rules are
jam packed with loopholes making them meaningless. So in short, Tauke is correctly noting that his toothless Goorizon proposal is just as toothless as previous network neutrality proposals.
All of these proposals have simply been show pieces, designed specifically
not to restrict Verizon in any way (while keeping real consumer protections at bay). Obviously that's precisely the way Verizoogle wants it as they push harder into the Android tablet/smartphone space.
·