Intellectual Property Law

Verizon: Google's Petition is a Waste of Time

By Cynthia Brumfield

I'm a little late on this, but last week Verizon officially responded to Google's surprise petition to condition Verizon Wireless' C Block 700 MHz licenses on a reiterated commitment that Verizon will follow the open access rules that apply to those licenses for its own handsets. (PDF of Verizon's response here.) Google told the FCC that it suspected Verizon was planning a "two door" policy regarding the requirements and would not abide by the rules for handsets it supplies to its customers.

Verizon's response as outlined in the filing: Google is talking nonsense and is simply wasting the FCC's time.

Google?s Petition, by its terms, seeks no more than a restatement of the open platform rules that apply to C Block licensees and a statement by Verizon Wireless that it will comply with these rules. By its literal terms, the Petition asks the Commission to do nothing: the Commission?s rules, including 47 C.F.R. § 27.16, already apply to the C Block licenses.

Verizon says that Google is using the legal process to achieve "ulterior motives."

Lurking behind Google?s ?narrow? request is an ulterior motive. Despite its protestations to the contrary, Google?s true goal is to use the licensing process as a platform to restart debate around the substance of the C Block service rules or the enforcement mechanisms put in place by the Commission. But that debate is over.

Moreover, Google's petition is inappropriate at this stage of the license application review process, Verizon says, and might even be unconstitutional because Verizon has done nothing to violate the FCC's rules. The FCC can't presuppose a violation unless one exists.

Simply put, Google?s model of regulatory enforcement would make a mockery of administrative due process and the right ?to petition the Government for a redress of grievances? as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Indeed, Google in effect invites the government to ?punish individual or group advocacy? -- here, by drawing an adverse inference from Verizon Wireless?s lawful actions -- something the government ?cannot constitutionally? do.

Not only has Verizon not broken the rules, but it also has every intention of abiding by them, the filing claims.

A group of consumer advocates, the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition, filed comments in support of Google's petition. (PDF)

The Commission must make it clear from the very beginning that it will not permit any sort of ?two door? policy that would undermine the C Block conditions by allowing Verizon to retail a category of devices that are locked to Verizon?s network, that block consumer access to certain web-based applications or content, or that fast-track equipment that fits its traditional business model while creating delays and barriers to potentially disruptive devices and applications.

Full post as published by IP Democracy on May 14, 2008 (boomark / email).