Google, Verizon deny priority access deal, but still talking

“Say it isn’t so!” The Kid famously pleads to The Slugger as rumors fly that the ball game he just lost was fixed.

That’s pretty much what everybody has been shouting at Google following a New York Times story suggesting that the search engine giant has cut a deal with Verizon in which the former will accept “pay for speed” priority access arrangements. Critics say that would kick net neutrality hopes in the knees.

But, unlike the fictional power hitter who walks away in shame, Google actually says it ain’t so.

“@NYTimes is wrong,” the company tweeted this morning on its public policy account. “We’ve not had any convos with VZN about paying for carriage of our traffic. We remain committed to an open internet.”

Ditto, insists Verizon.

“The New York Times article regarding conversations between Google and Verizon is mistaken,” the carrier wrote to us this morning. “It fundamentally misunderstands our purpose. As we said in our earlier FCC filing, our goal is an Internet policy framework that ensures openness and accountability, and incorporates specific FCC authority, while maintaining investment and innovation. To suggest this is a business arrangement between our companies is entirely incorrect.”

Frameworks needed

OK, fine. Newspapers make mistakes. But the Times didn’t just fabricate this out of whole cloth.

We’ve still got to believe that something is going on here. Neither company is denying that they are having serious conversations with each other. One has just ruled out “paying for carriage of our traffic” and the other insists that the discussions aren’t moving towards a “business arrangement.”

But they’re both still talking—to each other and to Federal Communications Commission via the agency’s now world famous “secret,” “back door” conferences to find Congressional solutions to the net neutrality impasse.

Here are the details on Google and Verizon’s latest ex parte meeting at the FCC:

“On Tuesday, August 3, 2010, Tom Tauke, Executive Vice President – Public Affairs, Policy and Communications for Verizon, and Rick Whitt, Washington Telecom and Media Counsel for Google, met with Eddie Lazarus, Chief of Staff, Office of the Chairman, and Zachary Katz, Legal Advisor to the Chairman, to discuss progress on potential legislative solutions for an appropriate network neutrality regulatory framework consistent with our joint filing dated January 14, 2010.”

That January filing emphasized the importance of “self-governing” forums to deal with open Internet and network management problems, but it also acknowledged the role of the FCC as an enforcement agency of last resort.

Both Google and Verizon agreed that there needs to be a “backstop role” for the government to step in “if or when bad actors emerge anywhere in the Internet space, and we do agree that involvement should occur only where necessary on a case-by-case basis.”

In those instances, intervention should be “surgical, swift and based on a finding of specific facts that establish such harm,” they wrote.

Update: Representative Anna Eshoo (D-CA) comes from Google’s part of the country (she’s from Palo Alto) and isn’t pleased with these reports of a deal. “I have real concerns about the reports of a potential deal between Verizon and Google on net neutrality,” she said this afternoon.

“FCC Chairman Genachowski is making progress on net neutrality, but he must act quickly to protect an open and free internet. And I believe these reported side deals by companies risk undermining his efforts. Premium pricing for access to the internet, whether accessing it via phone or internet, is bad for consumers, especially those who can’t afford to pay for high speed access. This would widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots. “