“We’ve been making this point for several months now but we can’t emphasize it enough: wireless is simply different,” writes AT&T’s Joan Marsh, vice president of federal regulatory affairs. 

Google responded to its critics with a blog post on Thursday, arguing that its proposal is a step forward for net neutrality because it would impose tougher regulations than have been in place in the past. It suggested that the framework was meant as a politically realistic proposal for net-neutrality regulations that can be imposed now, rather than a document that represents the company’s final word on Internet openness. 

“In the spirit of compromise, we have agreed to a proposal that allows this market to remain free from regulation for now, while Congress keeps a watchful eye,” writes Washington telecom and media counsel Richard Whitt. 

Free Press spokeswoman Liz Rose said the groups chose Google’s headquarters, and not Verizon’s, because they believe Google’s stance constitutes a reversal, whereas Verizon has never been on their side, according to Rose.

The “evil” rhetoric from protesters riffs on a Google corporate motto: “You can make money without doing evil.”