This sounds like a job for John Kerry:

[beachmom]

Read this DAMNING article in Wired about ISPs and their idea of "innovation":

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/06/you-dont-want-isps-to-innovate/#ixzz0rsLqoc6a

It's actually a discouraging article but this part struck me:

But the large telecoms would rather spend their money and time fighting the FCC over some basic regulations — the right for Americans to use the software, services and hardware of their choosing, without unfair discrimination by ISPs — than build world-class networks.

They’d rather plot to get themselves some of that sweet money flowing to online services, instead of concentrating on what the country really wants and needs, which is fast, cheap and open internet access.

The ISPs would rather be in a world where certain online services are locked only to certain ISPs — like ESPN’s streaming video is now — so that they can have a lock on customers that isn’t dependent on them actually building out the best infrastructure they can.

Building out infrastructure means redirecting stock-dividend dollars and putting them back into the company, which Wall Street punishes companies for — and which hurts the massive stock packages of telecom executives.

It’s literally not in telecom executives’ best interest to invest in broadband and solid networks.

Huh? Streaming ESPN video is not available everywhere? Apparently not:

http://newteevee.com/2010/06/15/microsofts-espn-deal-may-not-be-a-cable-killer-after-all/

(this article is about streaming on an XBox)

The good news, for customers of companies like Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and Charter is that they’ll have access to the ESPN content even if they’re just high-speed Internet customers of those providers, with no pay-TV subscription necessary. So if you’re a Comcast customer and love ESPN, by all means cut your cable subscription and go broadband-only, maybe supplementing Xbox Live ESPN with a Netflix subscription and lots of Hulu.

But for a number of cable subscribers, that option won’t be available. For some, the ESPN content won’t be available on Xbox Live — even if they get ESPN as part of their basic cable subscription. That’s because some cable providers — including cable companies like Time Warner Cable and Cablevision — don’t have a deal with the ESPN for its broadband-only content. (A full list of providers that have signed affiliate deals for ESPN3 content is available here.)

A list of which ISPs you need to have to get ESPN video streaming:

http://espn.go.com/espn3/affList

This is of course NUTS. The internet should mean the internet. Period. We're not doing cable tv on the internet. In fact, this is the first instance where we can show what the whole concept of net neutrality means. This is not internet speed, however, but availability. And bizarrely enough, it is not the ISPs but ESPN itself which is forcing this situation. Two articles with details:

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/06/cable-isps-see-net-neutrality-foul-in-espn-online-video-charges/

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/cable-group-turns-net-neutrality-around-over-isp-access-fees.ars

My point is this is about SPORTS. And Sen. Kerry should be monitoring this situation. The big guns all have paid btw, so this would affect small time ISPs like in a rural community or a condo association. But it really creeps me out. Wired mentioned that Hulu.com could pull this. Or basically any website people are addicted to (like Facebook or who knows what else).

[BlueIris]

1. Disturbing. It'd be nice if someone would get on it, even if it isn't JK. nt