After reading an article on Google's "flip-flop" on Net neutrality, I came away with a foul taste in my mouth -- not because I believe Google is "flip-flopping" on the matter, but because the circumstances are not nearly as black and white, nor as duplicitous as the author would have us believe. If we're going to win any sort of Net neutrality fight, we can't muddy the waters with innuendo and false reasoning.
Let's start at the head of the matter: Google doesn't want Google Fiber home users to run "servers." This, to me, is a completely acceptable stance. Google Fiber offers bandwidth at a level that most large companies don't enjoy, and it's designed to be fast and responsive for home user applications. This means smartphones, laptops, televisions, and whatever consumer-grade applications and devices you can come up with. What Google is saying in the TOS is that it doesn't want someone to pay $120 per month for Google Fiber, then set up a few 42U racks of servers and run a hosting company out of their basement. That's a completely different matter than using a Slingbox, running a Minecraft server, or SSHing into your home network.
[ Also on InfoWorld: Challenged by Google Fiber, ISPs opt to hasten their demise. | Get the latest practical info and news with InfoWorld's Data Center newsletter. ]
The fact is, Google is well within its rights, and perfectly consistent with the Net neutrality concept, to ban "servers" from its service. Google Fiber is not, nor was it ever, designed for corporate use. Google claims it will be offering a business-class service in the future, and I expect it will have a similar TOS to other business-class services from other ISPs, in that running servers is not only OK, but expected -- hence the term "business-class."
The quibble is this language: "Unless you have a written agreement with Google Fiber permitting you do so, you should not host any type of server using your Google Fiber connection..." Broadly defined, that could be anything, and I fully agree that Google should modify this language to make its intentions clearer. However, that does not mean it's flip-flopping or even backtracking on its Net neutrality stance.