The best short comment I've read on the mating dance between Verizon and Google is the Great Grimmelmann's About That Open Internet Thing.
A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Bluessky Posts- 2-1 with Rao in dissent. (And stayed pending appeal to SCT.) Which makes me wonder, when is the last time Rao voted against Trump? If any.... www.nytimes.com/live/2026/08... August 7, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell Torts: Christopher J. Robinette, Gaming the Standard, JOTWELL (August 7, 2026) (reviewing Ani B. Satz & Liza Vertinsky, Customary Corruption, 66 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 693 (2025)), torts.jotwell.com/gaming-the-s.... August 7, 2026 Jotwell
- TIL that disgraced former NC Congressman Madison Crawthorn is trying to carpetbag himself into an open Florida seat, kick-started by $500,000 of this own money. (Apparently it's not going great.) floridapolitics.com/archives/777... August 7, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- At least five of these are already true or will be true by the end of next week. August 7, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- I have a personal and maybe political commitment against cannibalism. Oh, and one against genocide. Good thing we don't have that code here. August 6, 2026 Michael Froomkin
Recent Comments
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 52 other subscribers
I’ve been very confused by this (and in theory I’m someone who should understand it pretty well) but I think things are starting to gel for me. I find the notion that all packets should be treated equally to be obviously ridiculous and I don’t think that’s what’s actually at issue in most cases. The problem here is that wireline networks are heavily overprovisioned – in the backbones, at least, there’s bandwidth to burn. That’s not the case in mobile cellular networks, however, and there’s more congestion and competition for a place in the queues. Traditional best-effort delivery will probably screw nearly everyone – clearly you don’t want “infrastructure” (routing, for example) packets being treated equally with web browser traffic and you probably don’t want real-time voice being treated equally with web browser traffic, either.
I don’t like slippery slope arguments but I suppose they’re unavoidable. So here, the question becomes “once you start making different guarantees about different kinds of traffic, how do you prevent the carriers turning this into a mechanism to squeeze more money out of customers?” Or at least that’s my understanding of the question. I don’t know what the answer is other than to point out that there’s already some traffic differentiating going on, but it’s invisible to users. I just really don’t know here, but the bottom line is that I find the suggestion that there should be no differentiation in traffic policy to be really odd. And I’ll note that it’s *especially* odd coming from AT&T customers .