Google, along with many other prominent internet and software companies, has fought hard to oppose the two-tier internet provision in the legislation as the company claims that this would threaten the democratic nature of the web by favouring those companies that can afford to pay for a faster route to their websites.

The faster web users are able to access a site, the more likely they are to use it, leading to greater revenues for whichever company owns the site and the telephone or cable company that provides access to it.

Smaller websites that cannot afford to pay for a faster internet connection will be the biggest losers if the provision becomes law.

Those websites that contain video or audio content and use a lot of “bandwidth” — the term used to describe the volume of data contained within a website — will be particularly hard hit, analysts fear.

But telecoms and cable companies that provide access to the internet — such as Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner and cablevision — stand to benefit from the new rules if the telecoms Bill is passed in its current form.

The telecoms companies hope that they can charge big companies that need to use a lot of bandwidth, such as Apple Computer’s i-Tunes or Skype’s internet telephone business, which will buy the faster access routes so that customers will get a faster service.

The telecoms companies also aim to gain a stronger foothold in the cable television business using DSL telephone lines to connect users to such services as video-on-demand.

Google was joined in its opposition to the legislation by a group called the Coalition of Broadband Users and Innovators, which includes Yahoo!, Microsoft, Apple Computer, Amazon.com and Disney.

Three weeks ago the House of Representatives also voted to pass the telecoms legislation without the so-called “net neutrality” provisions recommended by the coalition.

The US Senate Commerce Committee yesterday echoed the views of the House and rejected an amendment to the pending telecoms Bill that would have required that all internet traffic be treated identically regardless of its “source” or “destination”.

After a three-day hearing, the committee rejected an amendment from Republican senator Olympia Snowe and a Democrat, Byron Dorgan, which aimed to prohibit phone and cable companies from limiting access to their high-speed internet networks.

“What’s at stake is the internet in the 21st century,” said Ms Snowe. “This is the preservation of digital democracy.”

There is still a small chance that the Bill will falter, however, as Senator John Kerry, the former Democratic presidential candidate, has threatened a filibuster to prevent the Bill passing through the Senate.

Times Recommends

• Hundreds sued for sharing games
• So you want to study law?
• How the courts are coping with the mortgage crisis