Google's $4.6 billion plan for an open wireless Internet

[Celebration]

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/07/20/google_fcc/

Would that all kings were so benevolent. Google announced today it would set aside at least $4.6 billion to purchase a slice of the public airwaves in an upcoming government auction of radio spectrum. The company is imposing one condition on its money: It will only participate, it says, if the Federal Communications Commission requires that all bidders for the radio waves be forced to adhere to principles of Internet "openness."

..............................snip...........

As it has outlined in a letter to the FCC (PDF) and numerous times on its company blogs, Google wants the agency to require that any firm that bids for rights to the 700 MHz spectrum promise to: 1) let customers download and use any software on the network; 2) let customers use any device on the network; 3) sell wireless space to any third-party wireless provider at commercial rates; 4) allow the wireless network to interconnect with other Internet service providers.

A couple of weeks ago, Kevin Martin, the chairman of the FCC, released a draft version of rules for the auction that were widely interpreted as siding with Google. In fact, Martin's draft only went partway toward full openness -- it allowed for points 1 and 2 from above, but not points 3 and 4. And that's where the $4.6 billion comes in: Google is using its considerable wealth as bait to bring Martin all the way to full openness.

Telecom firms loathe these openness principles, and they've been lobbying Martin to reject Google's plan by arguing that any rules would make the spectrum less attractive to bidders -- and, therefore, will result in lower revenues for the government in an auction. Google's money eviscerates that argument: Google will put its billions in only if the FCC adopts all four principles of openness, CEO Eric Schmidt told Martin in a letter (PDF). And the government stands to make a lot more money at auction if Google participates than if it does not.

It's a brilliant strategy, one that puts wireless companies in a tough spot. We've long known that Google hired the smartest engineers in the world. Now we're seeing their public policy gurus aren't too shabby either.

[aquart]

1. A free and open internet is Google's bread and butter.

[Skidmore]

18. Remember the air waves were free and upen until they were

not free and open anymore. All it took was some collusion with Congress.

Think about it. Who owns the effin' air? Who owns the sound that travels in the air? Mankind deserves to become extinct.

[madokie]

2. if what they say is so then good for them

[karlrschneider]

4. Is their plan for the new facility over at the Industrial park still in place?

I haven't heard anything lately...

[madokie]

5. yes it is, dirt work is being done for the new construction

I read they were moving equipment into an existing building there also. Don't hear much about it while out and about though.

[karlrschneider]

6. thanks...I might have a look next week...need to get some welding gas tanks filled

in Chouteau...
:-)

[AX10]

3. Let's send this to the greatest page.

[lvx35]

7. The value for the American people is clearly in an open network.

Lets no forget who pays the FCC here, either.

[CK_John]

8. You don't really believe that any strings put on by a bidder would be

binding? Google is just trying the poison the bidding and not have to pay anything. IMO, they are setting up a challenge in case they lose the auction.

This is another ploy like their new cookies policy, to pretend to be what they were and not the hugh megacorp they have become.

[lonestarnot]

9. I don't trust them.

[lvx35]

10. I don't think you should trust them.

but sometimes corporations find it in their interest to do good things, and this might be such a time.

[cutlassmama]

12. me either. Google has always been about invasion of privacy.

If you have their "tool bar" delete it from your computer. It retains information about where you've been on the internet.

[lonestarnot]

13. yes they have, and it better not be anywhere on my computer.

[cutlassmama]

14. Look for it. I was shocked to find it on mine. It got deleted immediately.

[siri2k]

24. What if we use igoogle? Does that get tracked as well?

[MLFerrell]

11. I can guarantee that even if Google's intentions are truly benevolent, the goddamned Right...

Will find a way to abuse their benevolence. It's their Modus Operandi, their one (and only) stock in trade. Abusing the public trust is the only way that they can effect any degree of efficacy.

May the Lord smite the Republican Party and ALL of their enablers. You know to whom I refer...

[cutlassmama]

15. This is beyond creepy.

Google has announced a goal of collecting so much information about individuals that it will be order to tell them what jobs to take and how to spend their free time.

Yet another reason to avoid using their services. I purposely split up my online activity between several services so that one provider does not aggregate all of my G2. Privacy is Freedom.

Google’s ambition to maximize the personal information it holds on users is so great that the search engine envisages a day when it can tell people what jobs to take and how they might spend their days off.

Eric Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, said gathering more personal data was a key way for Google to expand and the company believes that is the logical extension of its stated mission to organize the world’s information.

Asked how Google might look in five years’ time, Mr Schmidt said: “We are very early in the total information we have within Google. The algorithms will get better and we will get better at personalization.

“The goal is to enable Google users to be able to ask the question such as ‘What shall I do tomorrow?’ and ‘What job shall I take?’ ”

The race to accumulate the most comprehensive database of individual information has become the new battleground for search engines as it will allow the industry to offer far more personalized advertisements. These are the holy grail for the search industry, as such advertising would command higher rates.

Mr Schmidt told journalists in London: “We cannot even answer the most basic questions because we don’t know enough about you. That is the most important aspect of Google’s expansion.”

He said Google’s newly relaunched iGoogle service, which allows users to personalize their own Google search page and publish their own content, would be a key feature.

Another service, Google personalized search, launched two years ago, allows users to give Google permission to store their web-surfing history, what they have searched and clicked on, and use this to create more personalized search results for them. Another service under development is Google Recommendations – where the search suggests products and services the user might like, based on their already established preferences. Google does not sell advertising against these services yet, but could in time use them to display more targeted ads to people....

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/c3e49548-088e-11dc-b11e-000b5df10621.html

[garybeck]

16. Google also heavily invested in new solar energy technology

http://nanosolar.com/

[Nimrod2005]

17. Nice, good for all of us!!!

[conspirator]

19. Google is just another filthy corporation. No matter how good they try to look. n/t

[Recursion]

20. *shrug* they get the important thing about the Internet

Which is that "top-down" doesn't work anymore.

[Indenturedebtor]

27. Not all corporations are evil

Just 99% of them :(

About google I don't know. Truly almost any company does some good and some evil to the community. Ultimately what we need are laws that level the playing field more between small business and big business (such as free internet), and that keep business serving people above profits, when the two conflict.

It is the nature of corporations to seek profit at all costs... it is the job of government to keep them from costing society without societies' informed explicit unanimous consent.

[muryan]

29. unfortunately the global market makes corporations highly profitable

what we can do is encourage the kind of behavior we want to see out of these large entities. like supporting google in internet accessability or other corporations who are taking the time and effort to see that the right thing is done. I know its few and far between but it doesnt help that people are so rabidly anti-corporate that they cant differentiate the good ones from the bad ones.

[FredStembottom]

21. As a musician - and a rabid music fan - I hope "openess" doesn't

...include rampant, Chinese-style, copyright infringement. I want all my musician heroes to be paid. Everytime.:scared:

[provis99]

22. copyrights and patents are government-enforced monopolies

They go right against the heart of free enterprise, yet ironically its the big right wing corporations and economists who support copyrights and patents. I support abolishing them completely. If you're a musician, earn your money the way working people do: spend your labor playing in front of audiences, not soaking up money via some corrupt government monopoly law set up to screw consumers. Thats no different than wastrels like Nicky Hilton who sponge off their investments, while not doing any work on their own.

[Tab]

23. Yes, but they're TEMPORARY monopolies

to allow people/corps to get reimbursed for their effort while eventually releasing the stuff into the public domain (eventually - corps do try to extend these periods).

What company is going to spring billions for medical research when they second they're done, anyone can copy it?

Why would I spend months or years, and tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions to develop software so it could be copied the second I release it? I can't "spend my labor playing in front of audiences".

And why, as a musician, should I spend months or years in a studio crafting an album, running into immense bucks, only to have it given away the second I release it? You say, go tour, but not everyone can tour, and without recordings, who's going to know who to want to watch.

Some people, like Prince, or groups like the Grateful Dead allow free distribution of some of their music, as do many indies, in the hope the exposure will boost their touring (well, not in Prince's case, he's just trying to piss off the record companies). Other bands and artists prefer to craft in the studio.

[Celebration]

25. And also, who would write books?

Good grief, we wouldn't have all the Harry Potter books because they would not have been written. No copyrights and patents? What a ridiculous idea.

[ooglymoogly]

26. hmmmmmm....lets see now....just how much is J K Rowling

worth these days and she certainly would not have written all those books without the hundreds of millions of dollars......yuh...fer sher. When any one person makes billions off writing a book or books or for making music it is time to examine our system. There are just too many starving people around the world to worship this kind of mammon.

[Randypiper]

28. No movies or tv

Just live performances?
Get real.

[FredStembottom]

30. Thanks for enlightening me as to what constitutes real work!

As I go about my day job of loading and delivering boxes up to 150 lbs. each (for up to 60 hours/week), I'll be thinking of about the distinction you made.

Of course it will take me time to get used to there being no more books as "real workers" like you will demand that prissy authors must make speeches before live audiences rather than get paid for "monopolizing" their thoughts onto paper.

And no more movies! Plays before live audiences only! I'll have an easier time getting used to that, as I have an interest in writing musicals - oh darn! I have been writing down my songs! I guess I have to sing them into the ear of each performer at every rehearsal everywhere - if I want to get paid for my songs!

Well whatever! Just so you don't get "screwed" and have to pay for the things you want to listen to or read or watch!

Welp.... gotta go perform the next 4 bars of my latest song before I go off to the air freight warehouse!

Thanks again!

[AX10]

31. kick