Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

[Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "JC Dill" <jcdill.lists () gmail com>
> If I drive from SF to LA for business or for personal purposes, my costs
> for the drive are the same. But the economy of doing it for business
> depends on what the client is willing to pay me. If they want me to
> drive to LA but only pay $10, it's not economical (from a business
> perspective) for me to do it. Right now, Comcast is carrying content
> to their customers "for free" and they want to be paid by the content
> providers (thru paid transit connections) to cover the cost of
> carrying that content traffic across their network to the end customer.

Comcast is acting, collectively, as the agent of their customers,
who I'm sure would tell you if you asked them that they believe the
contract is "I pay you, and you carry my packets back and forth as I 
direct, as long as I follow your TOS" -- which pulling movies from 
Netflix does not presently violate, AFAICT.

> Sure, Comcast's customers are also paying Comcast. But Comcast wants
> to get paid from the content provider. I think they are betting that in
> the long run it's easier to make money from content providers (and
> have the content providers charge customers or advertisers as necessary to
> make a profit) than to make money from the end consumer. And I think
> they are right about this "easier" part. I think that they will succeed
> at pressuring big content providers to play by Comcast's rules and
> shift the cost of running Comcast's network from consumers to content
> providers.

I'm sure that Comcast does think it's easier.  But that doesn't mean it's
a valid legal interpretation of their contracts with their direct customers,
and I smell a class-action lawsuit brewing in the mind of some tort-king
on just that point.

The underlying problem, of course, is lack of usable last-mile competition;
see also my running rant about Verizon-inspired state laws *forbidding*
municipalities to charter monopoly transport-only fiber providers, renting
to all comers on non-discriminatory terms, which is the only practical
way I can see to fix any of this.

Cheers,
-- jra