“It’s disappointing that Sens. Snowe and Dorgan would introduce essentially the same bill to regulate the Internet that went down to such decisive defeat in Congress last June.

“As Democrats and Republicans recognized, these proposed neutrality regulations essentially create a legal loophole for large content companies such as Google, eBay and Amazon to avoid paying for the online bandwidth they use. These regulations are completely unwarranted and would ultimately force consumers to pay an increasing percentage of the huge cost to upgrade America’s vital communications networks.

“With America lagging many of our economic competitors in broadband deployment, Congress’ focus should instead be on spurring affordable high-speed deployment. And as numerous opponents of neutrality regulations, including the Communications Workers of America, have correctly noted, promoting deployment, not cumbersome new regulation, is the key to economic growth and job creation.”

Last June, the House rejected a proposed Net neutrality law 269-152. Approximately 58 Democrats joined 211 Republicans in opposition. Also last year, state legislators in Michigan rejected a bill to establish statewide neutrality regulations.

The Hands Off the Internet coalition is a Washington, DC-based coalition of companies and nonprofit organizations that believes the Internet has flourished because government has not tried to regulate it. Members include Alcatel, AT&T, the National Association of Manufacturers, FiberControl, and Cinergy Communications. Nonprofit members include Citizens Against Government Waste, the American Conservative Union and the National Black Chamber of Commerce.

Chris Wolf, co-chair, Hands Off the Internet coalition

Yes, it was a few weeks ago now, but humor us: We just can’t get enough of that speech by FTC chair Deborah Platt Majoras, where she offered her considered opinion on whether new Internet regulations are necessary. (In sum: Not now.) Here’s one of her best bits:

“While I am sounding cautionary notes about new legislation, let me make clear that if broadband providers engage in anticompetitive conduct, we will not hesitate to act using our existing authority. … But I have to say, thus far, proponents of Net neutrality regulation have not come to us to explain where the market is failing or what anticompetitive conduct we should challenge.”

Got that? There are already government officials that Google, Amazon, Yahoo and their Internet allies could complain to if the telecom industry was acting unfairly.

More proof that they don’t have any serious complaint, they just want a handout. We hope that the Senate, when it reconvenes, takes Ms. Majoras’ thoughts into consideration.

It might not have been on par with Tyson-Holyfield, but this week’s public dust-up between Amazon and Google at the PFF Summit must have been fun to watch.

According to CNet, things got fun when an audience member suggested that Google’s deal to integrate its services with Sony Ericsson phones violates Google’s Net neutrality pledges. The deal lets Google’s search option appear faster than any rivals.

An attorney for eBay interjected and said he’d “like to hear” someone from Google explain this. (Loose translation: “Mel Gibson will have an easier time explaining his comments than you’ll have with this one.”)

“We’re not sure the wireless world is quite the same,” replied Google’s attorney in perfect legal-speak. “This may be where we part company with you guys.” (Loose translation: “And the horse you rode in on!”)

Given Google’s penchant for cutting deals to elbow out competitors, we’re not surprised that the harmonious veneer of “neutrality” is wearing away from the pro-regulation crowd.

In fairness to Google, it’s using the free market to create new consumer-friendly services. Too bad the company is pushing so hard to regulate away efforts by other companies to do the same thing.