It looks like Verizon isn't taking those
700MHz spectrum
open access rules very seriously, and a certain competing bidder isn't real happy. In a petition filed with the FCC by Google, the company alleges that Verizon is willfully ignoring the "plain meaning of the [open access] rule" by suggesting it will allow one type of access for users who use Verizon-approved devices, and another for those using third-party units. According to the document, "Verizon's position would completely reverse the meaning of the rule such that the open access condition would apply to none of Verizon's customers, and thereby render the condition a nullity." The search giant is calling for the FCC to block Verizon's $4.7 billion bid on the spectrum unless the company agrees to comply with the previously-decided open access rules. Since this isn't the first inkling we've had that Verizon
wasn't down with open access, we're not surprised, but it looks like Google has a little more fight left in them -- and that could make all the difference. [Warning: PDF read link]
[Via
IP Democracy; Thanks, Bram]
posted May 5th 2008 5:37PM
Putting the FCC requirements aisde, dare I say "you get what you pay for"? and google you didn't pay a damn thing so be quiet.
"you get what you pay for"....EXACTLY!! They paid the price for open access and must follow the rules of the game! I know Google forced them bid the amount they did but that's the name of the game, if they didn't like it they shoulda kept out of it.
Seconded. If they wanted it their way, then they certainly could've ponied up for the block. I'm sure they have enough in their treasure vaults to pay for it.
You get what you pay for... so Verizon paid enough to violate the rules? Call me old fashioned, but I still like to believe there's no price on fair play.
This page has the lowest IQ of commenters i"ve ever read
There are rules that came along with the auction. If u break those rules your bid becomes null in void
I like how you "[put] the FCC Requirements aside" as if that somehow makes your snarky comment valid at all. Not to mention that THE REQUIREMENTS ARE THE POINT.
God damn, is this all open-source and open-access supporters know how to do? Bitch, moan and finger-point until someone steps in to hold their hand?
Is this all idiots know how to do? Defend a point that is entirely wrong in every possible way?
All I have to say is: F U C K Verizon!
GOOGLE F*CKING ROCKS WOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! keep on truckin google the world needs big companies like you to keep an eye on the shiesters (verizon) i Just recently dumped verizon for ATT because I've had enough of their scumbag bs and they realize people are leaving for more open companies thats where all this any device any whatever verizon gargle came from, ill believe it when i see it. verizon just doesnt have it in them to not be scumbags this is case in point verizon trying to reinterpret the rules to their liking I could only imagine how useless a 3rd party 700mhz device running like verizon would like it
Lein: "God d**n, is this all open-source and open-access supporters know how to do?"
No. We "open-source" and "open-access" supporters are fighting against profiteering! Why pay for Adobe Photoshop when you have GIMP 2 around? Why mess with the PSP with all their firmware crap for emulators when you have the GP2X to run it? Would you pay for high speed internet when Google actually provides it for free? Would you pay for an expensive internet suite when AVG and Spybot are around? No, no, no and no.
I don't understand? So the block was up for auction, but whoever paid the premium gets no advantage over anyone else?
Then why did anyone pay anything for it...if what same access to all?
Seriously, Google cries wolf now that they don't have full control???
I hate Verizon as much as the next person, but they actually paid something....what was the point of spending $5 billion for something they have no control over....seriously????
Verizon's advantage is that they now "own" that portion of the spectrum. According to the rules they have to provide "open access." Which as I understand it means they can not limit the devices allowed to use the spectrum. What they can do is charge for the use of that spectrum. If Verizon would just open their eyes to the possibilities this whole 700 MHz deal could be a HUGE cash cow for them.
With the purchase of this spectrum Verizon has become (in part) what many of us have been screaming for for years... a "dumb pipe" provider.
I dont really understand what they are saying. Are they saying that verizon would try to fuck over its own customers? Thats whatI gather from this sentence "Verizon's position would completely reverse the meaning of the rule such that the open access condition would apply to none of Verizon's customers, and thereby render the condition a nullity."
They're saying that Verizon is fucking over the government, which presumably got less money for the spectrum because there was a mandate for open access than they would have without the mandate.
Maybe i am reading this wrong. But i understand what Google is saying..
Verizon shouldn't be allowed to dictate two different "OPEN ACCESS" systems depending on the handset you choose...That kinda defeats the purpose of say it together kids......."OPEN ACCESS"
So basically from VZ standpoint: THEY choose the phone you get to use on their "OPEN ACCESS" system.. Sounds real consumer friendly doesn't it?
Google is worried that their Android handsets wont have any value on a crippled Open Access system verizon will implement for Third-party developers only.
THE RICH GET RICHER.
Verizon Wireless EXISTS to fu*k over its customers and anyone else who is willing to take it.
Anyone with real knowledge on this issue, if this ends up in court, is there any way that verizon could win? Isn't there an established definition of open access that that forces allowing any device and any service?
Verizon did not break the rules (yet) my understanding is Google asked the FCC to block it if they do.
See, the problem is that Verizon is a charter member of the Corporate A-holes club, and is still run by the good old boys in corporate suits. These guys have a wonderful way getting around any regulation, deregulation, rules, accepted practices and all that other bs meant to keep them in check.
Google by comparison are boyscouts. I am not saying that they are any more benign or consumer-friendly than Verizon, but just that they are still too inexperienced at getting what they want. Google certainly is trying to be the next Borg, but it is not quite there yet.
While it is good that Google is going to the FCC, there are only two things which keep the corporate good old boys from getting what they want: 1)A good attorney at the DOJ 2)Rival corporate suits. So if Google wants Verizon to follow the rules, it is going to have to do more than just complain to the FCC, otherwise, Verizon could easily get away with it.
Google is mad that it cannot freeride? Verizon may combine its CDMA and C block spectrum into a super channel while C block licensees only get C block access.
Google is in a bad spot because they did not win the auction. they have no interest in the spectrum and no direct cause of action. Their complaint is premature - Verizon has not done anything yet....
There are plenty of ways for Google to lose - and they'll most likely get shunted in a way nobody is thinking about.
At least somebody cares about the consumers.
Don't be fooled. Google cares about Google.
Or advertisement clicks.
But if google caring about google benefits consumers, thats allright with me.
Google is just hating because they lost the bid
Are you serious?
Google never wanted it to begin with they just wanted open access.
It's not a money issue. This is about following FCC rules.
STFU troll
how are you gonna low rank me for an opinion im not a troll check my posts fuck u asshole
Ha ha, someone is defensive! Lighten up buddy, it's the internet. And if we're lucky we won't have to have an exclusive contract with Verizon to use the internet via the C block.
Uhm terms of the auction? HELLOOOOO
Google = Fighting for the consumer
Verizon = Giving it to the consumer (from behind)
They both have equally shitty logos.
No argument there.
Here, here my friend. Here, here.
Una mierda!!! :P
GO GOOGLE! GO!
OPEN ACCESS FTW!
CLOSED ACCESS FTL!
Ugh... I regret making my comment the moment I pressed "add."
you're still getting voted down
I don't care, matthew.
Whether it's worded poorly or not, I still agree with the sentiment:
Go Google! Kick Verizon IN THE NUTS! :-)
And people wonder why I'd never give Verizon any of my money. Best network and best phones aren't anywhere near as important to me as not being run by Sith Lords.
I don't think Google are a bunch of white knights here, but their agenda happens to benefit the consumer more than Verizon's does. So, GO GOOGLE!
Thanks, john. :)
*encoded message*
V guvax znggurj vf n irevmba rzcyblrr, yby.
What's basically going on, is Verizon is going to have one network (presumably a fast one) for their "Approved" devices, and another (presumably shitty) connection for unapproved devices. This way they can still screw non-verizon users, while still saying that they have an open network.
exactally!!!!!
Preach on brotha! thats exactly what VZ will do..
SNEAKY BASTARDS.
It's not just non-verizon customers they're screwing. It's also any verizon customer who chooses to not use one of the verizon approved devices.
Dead on, Zak.
With GoogleZon looming, I guess it's only a matter of time before EPIC 2015...
I thought Plessy v. Ferguson died in the 50's!
ha, this is going to be good....