Internet Web site owners and content providers such as Netflix, Amazon, and Facebook profit from services they sell over the Internet. However, most don't compensate carri- ers for the infrastructure over which their services are transmitted. Rather, they pay for connections from their site to the Internet. When these carriers transfer traffic to other networks needed to reach customers, neither the other network owners nor the carrier connected to the subscriber are compensated. (See Figure 6-3.) Proposed Modifications to Network Neutrality Most large carriers that own broadband infrastructure connecting subscribers to the Internet would like to see modifications to parts of network neutrality. On August 9, 2010, Google and Verizon issued a joint statement for legislation. They stated that they agreed to most, but not all, facets of network neutrality for wired broadband networks. An exception on wireline networks is for new, differentiated applications for which carriers would be allowed to provide special treatment. The statement listed the follow- ing possible exceptions: healthcare monitoring, gaming options, advanced education services, and new forms of entertainment. The rationale is that these applications, with @@@@@@@@ ######## # Carrier B Not compensated Carrier A Skype pays nothing Carrier C to Carrier A Skype pays nothing to Carrier C Customer in Chicago holds a video conference with its Providers' Beijing office; it pays a flat coverage areas monthly fee to Carrier A = Router Beijing office pays fees to Carrier C Figure 6-3 With network neutrality, Internet application providers do not pay fees to long-haul carrier B for transmitting video or other high-bandwidth applications. Network Neutrality their high-bandwidth requirements, might require Quality of Service (QoS) or other special treatment to operate smoothly. The Google and Verizon joint statement took additional exceptions to applying network neutrality rules to mobile networks. They further stated that mobile networks are still developing an