[daveslash]

This is a good point. Perhaps they're a utility and/or common-carrier only in certain contexts? The article points out "Public utility comes from a contractual relationship between the government and that entity that is supposed to be the public utility". Other's have pointed out that when government employees use Google search, there's no contract in place. The latter may be true, but I'd argue that there is a contract in place when schools are paying for the Google Apps service and Chromebook hardware.

If you have to use the Google products in a school, and the school has a contract with Google, that seems like a utility and/or common carrier. The analogy that I use with my friends is "You have Verizon for your mobile phone, yeah? I have ATT. We can call/text each other, right? Of course - that's how phones work. What would you think if you could ONLY call Verizon customers, and if you wanted to call/text me, you had to get an ATT phone? And what about all those land lines, customer service lines, etc... how annoying would it be if everyone had to have the same phone company, and the companies kept coming and going in and out of vogue? All the older people user Company X, Millennials are all on Y, and the kids are all about Z...."

Most people think that's an awful, terrible world to imagine. That said, it reminds me a little of Neil Stephenson's "Snow Crash" ~ one review says "Snow Crash is a mind-altering romp through a future America so bizarre, so outrageous.... you'll recognize it immediately"