I don't know about you but I am sick of hearing how these racketeers rip us all off and seem to get away with it. The response becomes "what are you going to do?...we have no power.." You know that is BS, legislators and ALL government leadership are supposed to be working for US, the people. How is it that so called leaders seem to forget that ?

A Summary on the Comcast/FCC Net Neutrality Hearing
Posted on February 27, 2008 - 12:10pm.

Comcast Threatens the Open Internet – FCC Hears Complaints
Last summer, users of Comcast internet services reported cut-offs and significant decreases in their download speeds when they were sharing large content such as video, audio and data files using a peer-to-peer sharing application known as Bit Torrent (www.bittorrent.com).
Here is a link to the scoop
Viva save access

Thanks to Rob McCausland for sharing the following:

free press: media is the issue

February 21, 2008

For Immediate Release

Craig Aaron , Free Press, (202) 265-1490, x25

CAMBRIDGE , Mass. -- On Monday, Comcast will be scrutinized by the Federal Communications Commission at a public hearing about the policies that will shape the future of the Internet. The Cambridge event will feature testimony from legal scholars, technology experts, entrepreneurs and industry representatives as part of the FCC's ongoing investigation into the blocking of legal content by the cable giant and other Internet service providers.

WHAT: A Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet
DATE: Monday, Feb 25, 2008
TIME: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
WHERE: Harvard Law School , Ames Courtroom, Austin Hall
1515 Massachusetts Avenue , Cambridge , Mass.

The SavetheInternet.com Coalition will be recording public testimony outside the hearing throughout the day.

In January, the FCC launched an official inquiry in response to a complaint filed by Free Press and members of the SavetheInternet.com Coalition -- as well as thousands of letters from concerned citizens. The Associated Press first exposed Comcast last fall for actively interfering with peer-to-peer file-sharing networks. The company argues the FCC has no authority to prevent it from blocking Internet traffic on its networks.

Comcast and other big phone and cable companies have been lobbying to kill Net Neutrality -- the longstanding principle that prevents them from discriminating against Web sites or services based on their source, ownership or destination. Last week, Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Chip Pickering (R-Miss.) introduced the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act" (HR 5353) -- landmark legislation that firmly establishes baseline consumer protections in communications law to ensure the Internet is open and free from discrimination.

"The value of the Internet comes from the millions of people and businesses who use it," said Marvin Ammori , general counsel of Free Press and lead author of the complaint that spurred the FCC's investigation. "We can't let the narrow interests of Comcast or any other network providers short-circuit the Internet's limitless economic and social possibilities. With stakes so high, the FCC must act quickly to shut down anti-competitive and discriminatory actions that put the open Internet in jeopardy."

The hearing will open with statements from all five FCC Commissioners, followed by a policy panel, where Ammori and renowned legal scholars Tim Wu of Columbia Law School and Yochai Benkler of Harvard Law School will square off against representatives from Comcast and Verizon.

"What we're going to see on Monday is a trial of the Internet," said Wu, who coined the term "Net Neutrality." "Comcast is in the docket, accused of crimes against the public interest, and we'll see how well they are able to defend themselves."

The second panel will delve into the technological aspects of Internet traffic. It will feature, among others, several experts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Scott Smyers of Sony Electronics; and Eric Klinker, chief technology officer of BitTorrent -- developer of the innovative file-sharing service targeted by Comcast.

Vuze Inc. -- which filed its own complaint against Comcast with the FCC -- will demonstrate its technology for sharing high-definition video prior to the first panel. Outside the hearing, there will be a "technology fair" where online innovators will show off their products and services.

"Now is the time to establish rules and regulations that will enable the evolution of the Internet," said Gilles BianRosa, CEO of Vuze. "A few powerful companies control the bandwidth through which consumers access Internet content, and through which innovative companies like ours deliver services. We support building an open Internet that fosters innovation for all."

In addition to testimony from experts in the field, the FCC has invited the public to share opinions for the official record. The SavetheInternet.com Coalition will be recording public testimony outside the hearing throughout the day. And consumers across the country unable to attend the hearing are invited to record and upload their testimonial videos to www.vuze.com .

Both the testimony recorded outside the hearing and the videos uploaded to the "FCC Channel" on Vuze will be submitted as a part of the official public record in this hearing.

Experts are available for interviews prior to the hearing. To schedule an interview, contact Craig Aaron of Free Press at (202) 265-1490, x25 or caaron@freepress.net.

View the FCC's official announcement and agenda here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280373A1.pdf

###

The SavetheInternet.com Coalition is a grassroots, nonpartisan alliance of hundreds of groups, thousands of bloggers, and more than 1.6 million concerned Americans who have joined together to protect Internet freedom and Network Neutrality. No corporation or political party funds the coalition. Statements by the SavetheInternet.com Coalition are not necessarily endorsed by every participating organization. Learn more at www.SavetheInternet.com

Sharing this from Chuck Sherwood, ACM list:

IS AT&T AVOIDING POOR, MINORITY NEIGHBORHOODS?

[SOURCE: The (Munster, IN) Times, AUTHOR: Charles Emory, Pilgrim Baptist Church]
[Commentary] To be sure, leaders at the federal and local level are working feverishly to spread broadband across the nation, reforming existing programs to support infrastructure investment, and experimenting with new ideas like the "Connect Kentucky" model that has helped increase the demand for broadband services in that state. But here in Indiana, we seem to have hit a roadblock on the path to broadband ubiquity. As reported in the Indiana Business Journal, AT&T is alone among broadband providers in refusing to divulge where it has deployed its fiber-optic U-Verse service. So the public has no way of knowing which households can access the lightning-fast service capable of delivering broadband, television and phone -- and which households are being left behind, perhaps because of their income, race or geography. Our elected leaders ought to act now to remedy AT&T's startling lack of cooperation and candor with regard to its fiber build-out. The public deserves some level of disclosure to ensure that broadband discrimination does not occur, and if the company refuses to comply, then lawmakers ought to revisit the video franchising legislation that exempted AT&T from the build-out obligations to which every other provider has adhered.
http://nwitimes.com/articles/2008/02/20/opinion/guest_commentaries/doc375d1be320f93346862573f4007be4e9

On February 17th of 2009 it is expected that most TV stations will quit broadcasting analog TV signals over the air. and older sets will go blank. The changeover to digital does not necessarily mean you have to dump your old analog TV set.

Most TVs made after 1998 have digital tuners but they were not required until last year. So you can still buy analog TVs on the cheap in some stores.

By Feb 2009, you could open your wallet for a new digital TV or, opt to continue to use your analog TV. You may need to purchase a converter box.

The government is giving away 33.5 million $40 coupons that would reduce the price of 19 converter boxes expected to cost $50 to $70 after the discount.

Consumers can try to download a coupon application at dtv2009.gov or call 888-388-2009. Hearing impaired can can call 877-530-2634 or 866-495-1161 for Spanish.

To find out where you can find a vendor to purchase converters visit:

dtv2009.gov/Vendorsearch.aspx to list those stores.

With all the "bundling" offers bombarding us every day in print and TV media, it seems cable and telecom companies can rake it in. Giving a little something back into the community should not be such a big deal for these cash cows.

Washington Post:

Comcast's Bundled Services Generate 1st-Quarter Profit Surge

Comcast Corp. said its first-quarter net income more than tripled, rising to $466 million, boosted by sales of bundled services to customers interested in the cable company's Internet, phone and on-demand video services.

A City Hall insider lamented that Charter's subscribers levels are not as high these days as it could be. As if to suggest that may have an impact on PEG license funding.

The issue concerning the level of cable subscribers is a non-issue when it comes to franchise license fees because the license payments are based on a percentage of Charter's gross annual revenues NOT subscriber numbers. With cost for digital and expanded services and basic fees as well as, in addition to, phone services. Charter gross revenues are higher than ever.

IT IS NOT UP TO CHARTER TO DETERMINE THE LICENSE AGREEMENT. IT IS UP TO THE CITY BASED ON ASCERTAINMENT RESULTS. City officials have a responsibility in this process to ensure community needs are met no matter how Charter plays it's political game at city hall.

Such a comment about subscriber levels is disturbing because it illustrates a lack of understanding about the process. It is not that person's fault. It appears, according to one councilor, that there is little briefing or updates on this issue. As I understand it the city has not entered into formal negotiations yet so it begs the question why are so many stakeholders or those who are concerned about the status of the cable franchise renewal feel like they are left in the dark on this issue? To be fair, it may be that the city simply does not know either. One has to cnsider, however, that the city solicitor and the outsourced expert are very experienced and knowledgeable about the subject of cable franchise renewal. City Manager O'Brien makes a point to personally pay attention to many matters and usually does a good job in taking care of business and yet, many fear the potential for this matter to fall between the cracks. If so, it will be devastating for ALL the stake holders. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

To void the process from the public eye at this pre-formal level, including from our city council members does a disservice to the citizens of Worcester and to those who are very interested in the fate of our public access channels. City leaders and the people deserve to know what is going on and in addition must be educated in the realities of the process. Public Access is a bastion for free speech, WCCA is an important institution to many in this city. It is as important as most other city business and should not be pushed aside. No one can tell you what is going on. It does not reflect well on the city that no one seems to know what the city's intentions are or about the status of the situation relative to the renewal process. The cable franchise renewal is a strategic opportunity for Worcester. Let's hope for some good news soon.

Some comments I found relevant to my last blog and to the subscriber level issue apply:

"Before you get too concerned about the impact that the recent drop in the number of cable subscribers is having on gross revenues (and consequently, on franchise fees and maybe PEG support funding), keep in mind that the cable industry continues to rake in record amounts of revenues."
Randy

"Our franchise fee and capital funding is based on a percentage of gross. Each is at an all-time high."
Alan

"So, dwindling market share yet higher gross profits - and this is the 'competition' that passes 'savings' on to the consumer - right?"
Michael