Too much hand-wringing. I couldn't access the UPenn article, unfortunately, but the other two were a little too doomsday about this (more so the LA Times). Somehow or other, when bandwidth is still scarce for TV content on the Internet, someone has to pay to upgrade the ISP systems. And presumably, pay an amount consistent with usage. I can see court cases, perhaps, where content owners sue an ISP for charging too much, e.g. when the content owner agrees to install his own servers. Such court cases can be expected, and would eliminate the possibility of favoritism. We sure don't want ISPs to become the new walled gardens! I might find the articles more believable if they addressed this issue. Instead, they seem to lump everything under "neutrality," using that lingo to put on some high drama. I was also amused to see the inconsistent, or let's say "conflicted," attitude about regulating the Internet like a telecom service. This is a completely different discussion from who pays for egregious overuse of bandwidth. And while such regulation might prevent the sort of favoritism that hasn't happened yet, it would have absolutely no impact on the pricing models the ISPs can apply. No one is going to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.