You don't need new net-neutrality rules to prevent such shenanigans; existing laws against fraud, trading on another's trademark, and monopolistic tying are plenty.

And even the hoi polloi loves themselves their 'Google'; it wouldn't take much to generate a consumer backlash against such a practice.

To the extent an ISP's heavy promotion or nudging might encourage people to try another search engine they might like as much or more than Google, that's a good thing. We need more search competition; a new entrant ought to be able to buy enough attention to get a fair look.

I agree, which is why I oppose net neutrality.

The example I used may be contrived, however I think the essence is true that an ISP could meddle with Google's traffic and send search traffic to a competitor.

Wait, these ominous predictions you cite are the reasons you are AGAINST net neutrality?

The variety of opinions and reasonings for the positions that people take in this debate are beyond me. Completely freakin beyond me.

My point is that I don't think it would be ominous for most users, which is why it should not be prohibited by law.

Of course I'd prefer not to have it, and I'd probably pay my ISP extra for a "neutral" net access plan, but I don't have a problem with ISPs trying creative packaging/pricing by capturing revenue via non-neutral business deals.

Maybe Comcast would offer 50GB for $30/month if it was getting 30% of the ad revenue Google gets from consumer broadband ad clicks.

Thought experiment: How much would you have to be paid to give up your right to vote for one year? How much to give up your ability to use Google search?

A Google competitor would be nice. How hard would it be to really replicate the ease of something like Google's hosted apps. Could users rent their own access to it? Could they use DDG safely, along with their own servers for hosting their mail, voice, etc.

But I don't want those services to be tiered. It enables Google and Verizon to negotiate for that streaming video/audio/voice space, if they decide it's not part of the "public internet".

note: I don't think the hosted apps would not be targeted, only search traffic.

It could become very ugly, and net neutrality is definitely the simplest and cleanest approach, but there might be a win for consumers with less neutrality too.

Grandalf's predictions were only ominous for Google; another vigorous search competitor with rising market share would be good for almost everyone else: end-users, advertisers, websites.