comcast

Comcast is at it again:

Level 3 Communications Inc., an Internet backbone company that supports Netflix Inc.'s increasingly popular movie streaming service, complained Monday that cable giant Comcast Corp. is charging it an unfair fee for the right to send data to its subscribers.

Comcast replied it is being swamped by a flood of data and needs to be paid.

Level 3 said it agreed to pay under protest, but that the fee violates the principles of an "open Internet." It also goes against the Federal Communications Commission's proposed rules preventing broadband Internet providers from favoring certain types of traffic, it said.

This is the exact reason that we need net neutrality. It also hits at the heart of what should be anti-trust laws. Consider the fact that Comcast isn’t only the largest residential internet provider in the country, but also the largest cable provider. Cable companies have seen a huge decline in subscriptions in recent years while companies like NetFlix have experienced huge growth. This is Comcast’s attempt to squash the competition and the Justice Department and FTC should get involved right away.

We knew this was coming:

The agreement will create a joint venture, with Comcast owning 51 percent and G.E. owning 49 percent. Comcast will contribute to the joint venture its stable of cable channels, which includes Versus, the Golf Channel and E Entertainment, worth about $7.25 billion, and will pay G.E. about $6.5 billion in cash, for a total of $13.75 billion. For now, the network will remain NBC Universal, but ultimately Comcast could decide to change the name.

I really wish the government would have stepped up and stopped this. We should be breaking up these mega-conglomerations instead of allowing them to expand.

We already know MSNBC has a history of promoting racism by giving constant airtime to Pat Buchanan, but now this atmosphere of promoting racism has floated on over to CNBC. Chris in Paris has the details:

What an amazingly ignorant thing to say. The CNBC editor rips Meb Keflezighi for not being American-enough and as a ringer for winning marathons. Forget that his family left Eritrea as refugees, and he attended high school here and then became a naturalized US citizen over ten years ago. Yes, that is the clear sign of a ringer. Who out there doesn't flee war just to win a race?

Keflezighi won the New York Marathon this weekend and many have been praising the fact that he was the first American to do so in nearly 3 decades. Some how though he isn’t “American” to Darren Rovell, the CNBC editor who wrote:

It's a stunning headline: American Wins Men's NYC Marathon For First Time Since '82.
Unfortunately, it's not as good as it sounds.

Meb Keflezighi, who won yesterday in New York, is technically American by virtue of him becoming a citizen in 1998, but the fact that he's not American-born takes away from the magnitude of the achievement the headline implies...

Given our disappointing results, embracing Keflezighi is understandable. But Keflezighi's country of origin is Eritrea, a small country in Africa. He is an American citizen thanks to taking a test and living in our country.

Nothing against Keflezighi, but he's like a ringer who you hire to work a couple hours at your office so that you can win the executive softball league.

The positive sign was that some American-born runners did extremely well in yesterday's men's race.
If any of them stand on the top step of the podium in Central Park one day, that's when I'll break out my red, white and blue.

I wonder what Comcast thinks about this racism problem at a company they are looking to take over? MSNBC and CNBC have no both given platforms to known racists, and apparently without any remorse. Perhaps its time for people to turn off these networks and show them that the American people won’t tolerate it anymore. While MSNBC is the only cable news network I can tolerate, I have cut my daily viewing of them by over 75%. They feel mighty enough to bash other networks for obvious race baiting tactics, yet they won’t acknowledge their own problems. I wonder if Keith Olbermann will even mention this guy in World’s Worst? It has all the key components to attract Olbermann – racism and sports. Somehow though I doubt it will happen.

Yesterday I posted that Obama had appointed some strong proponents of Net Neutrality to his transition team to oversee the FCC. Now we find out that another Democrat is working to bring actual Net Neutrality into law:

A lawmaker is bringing the issue of net neutrality back into the spotlight. Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) plans to introduce a bill in January that would stop Internet service providers from blocking and managing certain Internet content.

The planned legislation follows a long battle between the Federal Communications Commission and cable-TV and Internet service provider Comcast. It would have the Internet Freedom Preservation Act bar cable and telephone companies from being Internet "gatekeepers" and keep the Internet open and free, according to Dorgan, who has introduced previous bills on net neutrality.

"He was the lead sponsor of net-neutrality bills for this session of Congress, which is about to end, and he will be introducing a bill in the next session of Congress," said Justin Kitsche, a spokesperson for Dorgan's office.

Of course the all powerful telecom industry is gearing up it’s opposition to the possibility of this new law:

"We don't believe legislation is necessary in this area and could harm innovation and investments," said Sena Fitzmaurice, Comcast's senior director of government affairs and corporate communications, in a phone interview. "We have consistently said that all our customers have access to content available on the Internet."

Hell he already taps our phones, why not everything else?

The Bush administration has accelerated its Internet surveillance push by proposing that Web sites must keep records of who uploads photographs or videos in case police determine the content is illegal and choose to investigate, CNET News.com has learned.

That proposal surfaced Wednesday in a private meeting during which U.S. Department of Justice officials, including Assistant Attorney General Rachel Brand, tried to convince industry representatives such as AOL and Comcast that data retention would be valuable in investigating terrorism, child pornography and other crimes. The discussions were described to News.com by several people who attended the meeting.

A second purpose of the meeting in Washington, D.C., according to the sources, was to ask Internet service providers how much it would cost to record details on their subscribers for two years. At the very least, the companies would be required to keep logs for police of which customer is assigned a specific Internet address.

We need Leahy and Conyers on this one. This is another blatant violation of consumer privacy. Knowing how the Bush twins act, I wonder what daddy would think of one of them sent a titty pic to some boyfriend via email and someone keeping it at an isp? There's nothing illegal with that, but it could be very embarrassing to Bush and his family. Conservatives = small government? Bullshit. This is more proof that they want the government to expand beyond belief.

Thanks George for taking away more freedoms and bowing down to Osama!