Here's the paragraph from the blog post:
- We both recognize that wireless broadband is different from the traditional wireline world, in part because the mobile marketplace is more competitive and changing rapidly. In recognition of the still-nascent nature of the wireless broadband marketplace, under this proposal we would not now apply most of the wireline principles to wireless, except for the transparency requirement. In addition, the Government Accountability Office would be required to report to Congress annually on developments in the wireless broadband marketplace, and whether or not current policies are working to protect consumers.
How do you read that? There will be transparency in how much people will pay for their service but no over-arching net neutrality rules, it seems.
Verizon's Ivan Siedenberg said on the call that putting too many restrictions on wireless networks now would not allow for the "supercharged growth" of the wireless Internet over time.
I wonder how much this might affect Verizon's plans for open devices on its CDMA and LTE networks, i.e., gear that you can buy without a contract? I'm still waiting for a call-back from Verizon on this, hopefully I can let you know.
Certainly, Google seems to have found that it is not as easy to break the cycle of two-year contracts with each new device. The relative flop of the Nexus One in the US saw to that.
Still the pair do say at the top of their joint blog: "Users should choose what content, applications, or devices they use, since openness has been central to the explosive innovation that has made the Internet a transformative medium."
I get the feeling this is just the start of this latest net neutrality spat. After all, we haven't even heard comment from any other carriers or cable operators on the modest Verizon and Google proposal yet.
— Dan Jones, Site Editor, Light Reading Mobile