Now begins the protracted chess match, pitting Google and the telecom industry against the Federal Communications Commission.

At stake: say so over whether there will be one tier, or multiple tiers, of Internet service for PCs and mobile devices moving forward.

That’s the upshot of Google and Verizon teaming up this week to suggest a new framework of federal laws governing “net neutrality,” the notion that all Web sites should be equally available to all persons.

One-tier net neutrality is essentially what we have today. The telecoms want multiple tiers so they can charge a premium to those willing and able to pay more for access to upper-level tiers.

In a nutshell, Google and Verizon are calling for new laws that would:

Enable an Internet with upper-level tiers.

Explicitly exclude Web-connected mobile devices, such as smartphones and iPad-like devices, from net neutrality.

Limit the FCC’s oversight of the Internet.

The Google-Verizon plan had been rumored for months, and consumer advocacy groups were well-prepared. Within minutes of the companies formally unveiling the proposal on Monday, consumer groups rallied behind FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s staunch support for pure net neutrality.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Essentially, this proposal is nothing more than two corporations meeting together and trying to carve up the Internet for their own advantage, Ã¢â‚¬Â says John Simpson, director of the advocacy group Consumer Watchdog.

The tech giants garnered support from the League of United Latin American Citizens and Navigant Economics, a Washington D.C. consulting firm. Brent Wilkes, LULAC executive director, on Tuesday called the Verizon-Google plan a “sound industry-led compromise.” And Navigant managing director Jeff Eisenach warned that the new net neutrality rules the FCC is expected to issue this fall would lead to “a well-worn and familiar path: regulate, litigate, appeal, remand, repeat.Ã¢â‚¬Â

Computer science professor Max Hailperin, an information technology public policy expert, says the Google-Verizon proposal, while calling for new rules banning telecoms from discriminating against Internet users, would also relegate the FCC to a vaguely-defined monitoring role, lacking any enforcement teeth.

“The legislative proposal seems to be as much an attempt to constrain the FCC as to constrain the carriers,Ã¢â‚¬Â says Hailperin, who teaches computer science and math at Gustavus Adolphus College. “The FCC would need to wait for individual cases to arise, and then eventually be taken up in case-by-case adjudications.”

Hailperin says the Google-Verizon proposal is purposely vague, a classic policy-influencing tactic used for decades in the nation’s capitol. It’s true intent is to drive consensus among telecoms and other supportive groups for its core principles.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Each of the parties that agree to the vague principles will then work to try to get them fleshed out to their liking,” says Hailperin.

By Byron Acohido

August 10th, 2010 | For consumers | Privacy | Top Stories