With no progress in sight, stalled contract negotiations between a popular sports cable network and New York’s dominant cable TV company continues to test the patience of customers and sports fans across the state.

Scores of Buffalo-area sports bars have canceled their commercial cable service with Time Warner Cable, generating plenty of business for DirecTV, which still has MSG on the lineup.  Customers across New York have also started to demand a refund of the estimated $4.50 a month Time Warner Cable no longer pays MSG, but still collects from cable subscribers.

http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WGRZ Buffalo Time Warner and MSG Network plan meeting this week 1-8-12.flv

Time Warner Cable and MSG’s dispute is ticking off Buffalo sports fans.  WGRZ visits area sports bars and talks with both sides in the dispute to learn the latest.  (4 minutes)

Now New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is brokering discussions between the two sides, in an effort to restore coverage of the Sabres, Rangers, and Knicks games all displaced from the Time Warner Cable dial.

“We have had constructive discussions with Time Warner and MSG Networks as part of an ongoing effort to facilitate progress in their talks,” said Schneiderman. “We are hopeful that the two parties will come to an agreement in short order.”

Schneiderman

So far, those negotiations seem to be going nowhere, and Time Warner released a statement stating they have not had any further discussions with the network.  The cable company has also hardened its position with respect to refunding customers for the lost networks.  While early attempts to win credit were successful, Time Warner representatives are now refusing to compensate customers for the loss of MSG.  Instead, they are offering a free month of their mini-pay sports programming tier, which must be requested to access.  After the first month, the cable company will bill customers $5.95 a month for the channels.

“That’s no help,” says Stop the Cap! reader Jean, a Sabres fan in Amherst, N.Y.  “Not only don’t we get our $4.50 back, they want to set us up to pay an extra $6 a month after the 30-day trial of their ‘compensation’ is up.”

Many of her friends who live in suburban Buffalo are dumping Time Warner in favor of Verizon FiOS.  Area sports bars are following.  At least a dozen have canceled their commercial service contracts with Time Warner Cable, many switching to satellite provider DirecTV.  Buffalo’s love affair with hockey is so intense, 5,000 people showed up last week at the First Niagara Center stadium to watch the Buffalo Sabres away game on large screen televisions hung above the rink.

Cashing in

Sports bars depend on lucrative sales during major sports events, so being without the Sabres proved unacceptable, a point driven home by MSG itself which continues to host free viewing parties at local establishments.  Buffalo wings were included for free.

Stop the Cap! reader Ruth Grunberg, who lives in Cortland, N.Y., has started a petition to demand the cable company refund subscribers the $4.50 a month effectively paid for channels they no longer receive.

“They recently raised rates 7% for the second time in a year and they no longer are sending this money to MSG,” Grunberg says. “They have no right to keep it and pay their bloated executives even more money. It is fraud and bait and switch to promise one thing and deliver another. They should offer a la carte service to solve a multitude of problems.”

The city of New York apparently agrees and continues efforts to pressure the cable company into compensating subscribers for the network loss.

WIVB in Buffalo reports area sports bars are canceling Time Warner Cable in droves as its programming dispute with MSG drags on with no end in sight.  (2 minutes)

Time Warner Cable subscribers who are passionate about their hockey and basketball won’t be watching all of the Buffalo Sabres or New York Knicks games, thanks to another year-end programming dispute primarily affecting cable subscribers in New York State.

MSG terminated their program feed for approximately 2.8 million Time Warner customers early Sunday, leaving the cable operator to make amends with irritated subscribers.

Once again, the cost of sports programming was the issue. MSG has raised prices at least 70 percent over the last five years, according to cable research group SNL Kagan.  The package that includes MSG and MSG Plus now sells at a wholesale price of more than $4.50 per month, rivaling the most expensive sports network ESPN, which will charge $5.06 a month in 2012.  Time Warner reportedly balked at a renewal deal for 2012 that would have increased prices well beyond the six percent the cable operator offered to pay.

Time Warner has e-mailed subscribers indicating MSG pulled the plug, and is offering some replacement programming to ease the suffering of sports-addicted subscribers:

At Time Warner Cable, we’re sports fans too – that’s why we fight hard to keep the sports you love on the air at a price you can afford.

With the game clock running down, MSG Networks rejected all proposals, refused to engage in any meaningful way, and refused to allow us to keep the channel on. In the end, MSG pulled the plug on Time Warner Cable customers. We regret that MSG Networks has taken away their sports programming, but remind fans that even without MSG, Time Warner Cable will carry nearly 20 percent of this season’s remaining Sabres games, and dozens of other NHL and NBA games and most of the NHL and NBA playoffs. For information on where to find your favorite teams, visit www.twcconversations.com/MSG.

We don’t think that MSG’s actions are fair to sports fans, so Time Warner Cable is offering the following in appreciation of our customers:

•

A special month-long preview of the Time Warner Cable Sports Pass, a package of more than 15 sports-oriented channels. This package—which normally costs $5.95 per month for residential customers—will be available from January 1 – 31, 2012. (Visit www.timewarnercable.com/sportspass to see the full list of channels and channel numbers.)

•	A free preview of the NBA League Pass premium sports package which offers up to 40 live games per week. This offer is good through January 8th and more details are available at www.twcconversations.com/MSG.

•

The launch of YNN Hockey Tonight, a new nightly hockey show, premiering January 2nd on YNN in Western New York, including the Buffalo and Rochester areas. YNN Hockey Tonight will feature live interviews & analysis, plus scores, standings and information from all around the world of hockey, every night at 11:15 PM through the end of the NHL season.

We think MSG is being unreasonable – and unfair to fans. They continue to demand a 53% price increase for their programming, which just doesn’t make sense. We do want MSG to return to our channel lineup, and we will continue to work hard to reach an agreement that gives you the sports you love at a price you can afford to pay.

Don’t forget: every TV provider is at risk for blackout threats. Last year MSG pulled the plug on DISH – so switching is not a solution. If MSG really cared about the fans, they wouldn’t be holding your sports hostage.

Thank you for your patience and continued loyalty.

Tell MSG to Get Real and Do the Deal.

MSG is telling Time Warner customers to cancel their cable service and sign up for Verizon FiOS TV or one of the satellite dish providers instead.  But those alternative providers are not happy with the rising cost of sports programming either.

DirecTV’s Michael White and Dish Network Corp. Chairman Charlie Ergen have both repeatedly criticized price inflation for sports networks, and both have fought their own battles over the issue.

WHAM-TV in Rochester talks with irritated sports fans about the loss of MSG Networks on Time Warner Cable.  (3 minutes)

Bloomberg News reports that wholesale rates for sports programming have grown so great, cable operators may be prepared to drop sports networks off cable television altogether.  (4 minutes)

RIM has a new PR problem.

Research in Motion, already reeling from a year of bad news about its beleaguered BlackBerry, is now red-faced over reports that two of its employees got drunk and engaged in raucous mayhem on an Air Canada flight to Beijing that grew so out of control, the pilots were forced to land the plane in Vancouver.

Now, the CBC has garnered an official transcript from a sentencing hearing which has further tarnished the image of RIM over its employees’ behavior, which a B.C. Provincial Court Judge called “disgusting.”

Pre-boarding, some fellow passengers noticed the pair of corporate executives appeared highly inebriated.

CBC News quoted from the court transcript: “…When the males boarded the flight they seemed quite intoxicated, they drank more, passed out, one would wake up and lean over the little cubicle, slap the other guy on the head because he wanted somebody to drink with, and then they would yell and abuse each other, then they’d pass out, then they’d wake up and start kicking again.”

When other passengers tried to intervene, they were threatened.  One was told “I know who you are,” while others were warned by one of the executives he would “off people when they left the plane.”

Eventually, both men were wrestled kicking and screaming to the floor, assaulting one flight attendant in the process.  Even a combination of plastic restraints and heavy tape were not enough.  Police reports indicate both men literally chewed through the plastic cuffs and ripped the tape off with their teeth.

At that point, pilots declared a security emergency and diverted the plane first to Anchorage, but quickly settled on much-closer Vancouver, where authorities met the aircraft and took both men into custody.

Air Canada eventually pegged its losses (assuming nobody files a civil case against the airline for the ‘air show’) at $193,900, which includes putting up passengers in Vancouver hotels overnight, extra fuel, navigation charges, and flying in a new crew for the resumption of the flight the following morning.

The B.C. Court Judge swiftly fined the two executives $70,000 to cover the costs of the hotel and meal vouchers for the passengers.  The judge wouldn’t hear defense attorney objections.

“I am somewhat sympathetic to your position but I am, quite frankly, absolutely disgusted with the actions of these two individuals who know better and acted like absolutely — well, I can’t say it. But that is the punishment that they should suffer,” the judge ruled.

Both men were quickly fired from the company when they returned to their Waterloo, Ont. homes.

CBC News has this exclusive report about the chaos caused by Research in Motion executives on Air Canada’s Flight 31.  (4 minutes)

Haven't we been here before?

History is best ignored when a Wall Street Journal columnist frames an argument in favor of strengthening the hegemony of Ma Bell, and darn ‘ole past precedent gets in the way of the writer’s “facts.”

Gordon Crovitz is a media and information industry adviser and executive, including former publisher of The Wall Street Journal, executive vice president of Dow Jones and president of its Consumer Media Group.  But today he’s unofficially, unabashedly AT&T.

In a column published this week, Crovitz hosts a whine and cheese festival on behalf of poor and abused AT&T, whose multi-billion dollar takeover of T-Mobile is in tatters. Crovitz places the blame squarely on the government for ruining everything:

How soon we forget the risks of overregulation: Last week, the Federal Communications Commission flexed the same muscle it once used to quash market forces in the phone industry to quash market forces in the wireless industry.

Today’s AT&T, a spinoff from the original, needs more spectrum to catch up with market leader Verizon, also a Ma Bell descendant, to support iPhones, Androids and other devices that feature video and sophisticated apps. It wants to buy T-Mobile, a division of a German company, which doesn’t have the resources to compete in the United States on its own. But the FCC decided to apply antitrust theory from the industrial era and claims to know better than wireless companies how they should operate their businesses.

AT&T’s proposed acquisition is best understood as a private-sector solution to a government-created problem. The FCC has not been able to get Congress to approve auctions to reallocate spectrum to wireless from less valuable uses. AT&T wants T-Mobile’s bandwidth so it can extend the latest fourth-generation network to 97% of the country from 80% and improve its spotty service in congested areas.

Under laws dating to the 1920s, the FCC gets to decide if a merger is in the “public interest,” a vague standard for top-down decision making. Government is the last institution in this era of fast technological innovation to act as if it has the information and power to dictate how change happens.

Crovitz apparently prefers AT&T and its phone pal Verizon Wireless dictate how “change happens,” because the two companies control the vast majority of wireless telecommunications in the United States.  Both also charge near-identical prices for near-identical levels of service.  AT&T & VZW are completely comfortable with that status quo, especially if disruptive competitor T-Mobile is dealt with in the usual industry manner (merger/buyout).

There is nothing vague about the FCC report that condemns the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile for the anti-competitive monstrosity it represents.  In hundreds of pages Crovitz evidently never read, a careful and credible argument against the deal was laid out for all to examine.  That evidence is far more persuasive than AT&T’s heavily-redacted filings the public was not authorized to see (for ‘competitive reasons’), and a multi-million-dollar-a-holler public relations distortion strategy based on hollow promises.

Playing Catch-Up With Verizon Wireless?  Hardly.

AT&T hardly needs to “catch up” with Verizon Wireless.  Both companies own wireless spectrum they have warehoused for “future use.”  As a backdrop to the merger, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has already indicated the agency is hard at work carefully re-allocating spectrum to make more room for wireless services.  The “bandwidth crisis” AT&T talks about is a convenient argument for a merger, until you realize T-Mobile’s mostly-urban wireless network won’t help AT&T achieve its goal of rural wireless expansion.  T-Mobile has never provided service in rural America and never will.

Crovitz attempts to leverage Verizon Wireless’ recent deal with America’s largest cable companies as an argument for the AT&T and T-Mobile merger, suggesting that deal was a game changer.  What goes unsaid is the fact AT&T could have pursued that deal for themselves.  Did they?  No.  Despite AT&T’s public relations spin, the proposed merger with T-Mobile is much more than a spectrum acquisition. As the FCC and the Justice Department have argued, this merger is about ridding AT&T of a competitor willing to offer more services at lower prices.  That forces AT&T to respond in kind to compete, and consumers have benefited greatly from that competition. Verizon Wireless is hardly competition at all considering both companies price services nearly identically.  Beyond that is Sprint, already saddled with the financial albatross Clearwire and questions about its long term viability in a duopolistic wireless market.

Crovitz is wrong on his other “facts” as well:

Deutsche Telekom is hardly short on cash.  The company has plenty of resources and could bolster T-Mobile USA to compete if it saw fit.  It doesn’t, preferring to focus on its more lucrative European markets.  Instead of selling the operation on the open market to other players, which could include foreign providers interested in competing in the high-priced American market, it elected to be courted by AT&T.

Overconfident AT&T

Henry De Lamar Clayton, Jr.: Author of the Clayton Act

The merger illustrates AT&T’s unparalleled level of overconfidence it could deal with regulators and consumer groups who would certainly object to the deal.  The company has since spent millions it could have used to improve its network on campaign-contribution-fueled support building on Capitol Hill, a shameless dollar-a-holler astroturf campaign that pays off non-profit groups to sing the deal’s praises, and an expensive ad campaign to sucker Americans into thinking reduced competition will somehow deliver lower prices and better service.

Even former Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin would have likely paused over such an obvious monopoly-building operation.  The Obama Administration’s FCC chairman — Julius Genachowski –  while often too timid for our tastes, at least knows when it is time to join the chorus of opposition.

The FCC doesn’t pretend to tell AT&T how to run its business.  It does, however, serve the public interest by providing checks and balances to unfettered corporate power.  While the Wall Street Journal‘s world view of capitalism would have been favored by the most egregious robber barons, history has taught us that when big corporations get a stranglehold on vital industries, the entire economy can suffer.

Crovitz would have us ignore the massive corporate abuses of 100 years ago that eventually provoked Congress into trust-busting legislative reform, breaking up the monopolies and oligopolies that presided over the railways, early telecommunications networks, and industrial raw materials like oil and steel.  Restrained competition brought monopoly prices and blockades against would-be competitors.  What was true then is still true now, only the technology has changed.

In 1911, the economy was powered in part by railroads, which transported goods and raw materials.  Telecommunications networks like the telegraph and early telephone helped conduct business and coordinated the movement of goods.  In 2011′s growing digital economy, telecommunications increasingly represents the railroads, telegraph, and telephone all combined-into-one.  Some of America’s richest tech companies depend on broadband and communications to fuel demand for their products.  Allowing AT&T to control the largest part of that pipeline could be disastrous to everyone but that company and their shareholders.

History Repeats Itself

In 1914, the Clayton Act was passed to put a stop to increasing anti-competitive activity and abusive market tactics.  Amazingly, the problems being solved a century ago are back with a vengeance today, all thanks to the endless drumbeat for deregulation, which has fueled mergers, acquisitions, and increased concentration of market power.  That Act cracked down on:

• Price discrimination: selling products and services at different prices to similarly situated buyers;
• Tying and exclusive-dealing contracts: sales on condition that the buyer sign exclusive contracts that force an end to dealing with the seller’s competitors;
• Corporate mergers: acquisitions of competing companies to reduce competition; and
• Interlocking directorates: Boards of directors of competing companies, packed with common members.

Today’s laissez-faire attitude towards government checks and balances helped provoke the Great Recession, corporate scandals of epic proportions, and a revolving door in Washington where regulators end up working for the companies they used to regulate. Just ask former FCC chairman Michael Powell. Three years ago he worked for us.  Today he works for Big Cable’s largest lobbying group — the National Cable & Telecommunications Association.  FCC Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker went to work for Comcast shortly after green-lighting their super-merger with NBC-Universal.

It’s All About the Money. Always.

The only thing stopping AT&T from providing wireless nirvana to rural America is its own unwillingness to spend money on behalf of customers to upgrade its network.  The company claims it didn’t see the value of spending nearly $4 billion needed to deliver expansive 4G service, but suddenly had no trouble at all finding nearly ten times that amount to purchase T-Mobile USA.

Did AT&T suddenly win PowerBall?

AT&T saw crushing a competitor Job #1.  Central Idaho’s 4G service could wait.

Crovitz later notes AT&T “was unusually blunt” criticizing the FCC report, a classic case of protesting too much.  The company got caught with its rhetorical pants down, with a series of evolving arguments for a deal that never made the first bit of sense once you began to dig deeper into their case.

In the end, Mr. Crovitz wants you to blame Big Government for AT&T’s pervasive dropped-call problem that its competitors don’t seem to have.

It’s not the company that owns and runs the network, it is that Obama and his nasty henchmen at the FCC who are responsible!  Who knew?

Bloomberg News reports the FCC found AT&T failed to demonstrate any real public benefit of its merger with T-Mobile USA.  (2 minutes)

You can look all over this astroturf group's website and never find the fact it's bought and paid for on behalf of Colorado's largest cable company -- Comcast.

The next time Comcast or CenturyLink wants to increase your rates because of the “increased costs of doing business,” you might want to ask them why they have collectively spent more than $300,000 on an astroturf campaign to stop the city of Longmont, Col. (pop. 86,000) from using excess fiber capacity to provide competition to the phone and cable company without raising taxes a penny.

Longmont voters are headed to the polls today with a simple question to answer: should the city be allowed to open their fiber network to all-comers to provide competitive video, data, and telephone services to city residents.  Longmont’s fiber network was constructed in the 1990s as part of its electrical infrastructure.  Some utility companies buried enormous amounts of fiber intending to use it to electronically collect usage data from ratepayers so meter readers could become a thing of the past.  Like in other cities, Longmont now has a fiber network that is woefully underused, and the city wants to open up the tremendous excess capacity for telecommunications uses.  They are even open to allowing Comcast and CenturyLink to use the network to help service their own respective customers, but the thought a new competitor (including a community-owned provider) might deliver service over that network has created an absurd $300,000 Hissyfit.

Comcast has been caught funding the majority of the opposition, the so-called “No on 2A” and “Look Before We Leap” projects, sponsored primarily by the Colorado Cable Telecommunications Association, which counts Comcast as a member.

But visitors to the campaign’s cheesy website never realize who is running the show because the effort hides its association with Big Telecom.

It’s a classic example of Astroturf Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.  Scare residents into believing the city will raise taxes or go into financial distress.  Raise uncertainty by claiming important details are being left out.  Encourage doubt by comparing the advanced fiber network with anemic public Wi-Fi failures of the past involving Earthlink (remember them?).

But the No on 2A campaign is also willing to check themselves into a deluxe suite at the Hypocrisy Hotel, accusing city officials of hiding the names of their pro-fiber supporters and backers, including (gasp!) a company based in France!

The No on 2A website breathlessly relates the incriminating documents were unearthed from “previously secret emails just made public thanks to a Colorado Open Records Act.” They suggest a nefarious connection with Alcatel-Lucent because that company, which sells products and services related to fiber networks, communicated with the city in a handful of e-mail messages last summer.  You know those French, always up to something.

When it doubt, blame the French for being in on it.

The rich, buttery irony of a “group” secretly funded by the state’s largest cable company accusing others of keeping secrets is ignored at Kabletown.

But then I’ve received e-mail from Alcatel-Lucent (and Comcast) myself.  And I have a French last name.  Sacrebleu!

The website’s “opponents,” evidently gleaned from the few hundred residents that signed their visitor’s book, includes names like Joanna Crawford, “Garrett County,” and El Cordova, which we think could be the name of a Mexican pro-wrestler, we’re not sure.

City officials are stunned by the sheer amount of money being spent by cable and phone companies to keep competition far, far away.  So apparently is the local media, which has taken to identifying the “grass roots” opposition right down to their job title and name of the lobbying firm they work for.

Take Times-Call, which helpfully discloses “Look Before We Leap” spokesman George Merritt is actually a senior strategist for Onsight Public Affairs of Denver.  That’s a real nice way to say “lobbying firm hired to develop social media strategies to snooker influence public opinion on behalf of corporate clients.”

You know you’re not dealing with a neighborhood group lobbying to reduce road speeds in the neighborhood or sign a petition for improved trash collection when you read Leap’s financial disclosure reports:

• $120,913.64 to mass communications firm SE2 of Denver for a variety of services, including mail pieces, consulting, two television buys and ad production and design.
• $70,500 to Rocky Mountain Voter Outreach of Denver for “canvass, management rent and miscellaneous associates.”
• $37,500 to OnSight Public Affairs for consulting.
• $22,000 to Drake Research and Strategy of Boulder for polling.
• $15,776.84 to Zata3 for phone work.
• $12,260 to Holland and Hart of Denver for legal expenses.
• $8,000 to EIS of Grand Junction for consulting.
• $4,334.65 to Campaign Products of the Rockies, of Denver, for a voter file, mailing lists, stickers and yard signs.
• $2,500 to Mark Stevens of Denver for research.
• $743.75 to Tim Thomas of Boulder for general campaign work.

The whole dog and pony show of Big Telecom money has bemused Longmont mayor Bryan Baum, who supports the 2A measure and believes the distortion campaign has gone way over the top.

“It doesn’t really matter at this stage of the game,” Baum told the newspaper. “It’s going to the electorate. The electorate will vote. And we will know on Tuesday how they voted – if they believe a $300,000 ad campaign, or if they believe the people they’ve entrusted their votes to.”

Some of that $300,000 has also gone into vilifying a real grass-roots effort in support of the Longmont fiber initiative — Longmont’s Future.  Comcast’s front group tried to raise questions about where that pro-fiber group got their backing and money.  The newspaper discovered Longmont’s Future isn’t backed by any French conglomerate or nefarious outside interest.  It’s the work of Jonathan Rice, who operates the website all by himself, spending a grand total of $353 to fight Comcast’s $300,000.

“Every single candidate for office and every incumbent, in every race, supports this measure,” says Rice. “But Comcast and its friends are more interested in profit than progress, and continue to run a smear campaign to spread misinformation and outright lies – they recently posted Mayor Baum’s name as an opponent of 2A when he is actually a vociferous supporter.”

Community Broadband Networks has compiled a series of articles detailing the project and helping to expose the so-called “grassroots” opponents.  We encourage readers to become better acquainted with the underhanded tactics community broadband opponents will use to stop anything that resembles competition.

Stop the Cap! received this unsolicited letter from an employee working at Frontier Communications about how the company has been running the business and treating their customers.  We’ve been able to independently verify enough of this letter, by talking with other Frontier employees, to highlight it for our readers. 

Frontier Communications is a long way from its progenitor (and namesake) — Rochester Telephone Corporation, which operated locally with excellence for 100 years.  Rochester Tel changed its name to Frontier Communications as it sought to abandon its image as a basic phone company.  It was later sold to Global Crossings, which later sold it to Citizens Communications, which decided to adopt the Frontier name itself.

Billboards sprinkled across Ft. Wayne, Ind., telling residents, “Frontier is pulling the plug on FiOS — Switch to Xfinity,” has infuriated Frontier Communications, who says it will continue to provide FiOS service in the area, at least for broadband, indefinitely.  Now the independent phone company has sent a “cease and desist” letter to Comcast officials demanding the billboards come down.

Frontier spokesman Matt Kelley accused Comcast of spreading false rumors in an effort to drum up business.

“Frontier is not planning on pulling the plug,” Kelly told WANE-TV. “We are going to continue providing FiOS service in Allen County and we have no plans to remove it.”

WANE-TV in Ft. Wayne led its newscast with the dispute between Frontier Communications and Comcast over fiber optic television.  Is the plug really being pulled? (Loud Volume Alert!) (3 minutes)

But Comcast officials note Frontier has been pushing existing customers hard to switch to satellite television service, and Frontier earlier announced dramatic rate increases for its fiber cable television service — rates much higher than other competitors.

Comcast issued a statement about the dispute:

“Comcast continues to invest in these markets, while Frontier has taken a number of steps to discourage new customers from signing up for its service and encourage current customers to seek alternative services from satellite. We are using these ads to make consumers aware of our Xfinity TV service as a better choice for consumers.”

HissyFitWatch: Oooh... Comcast!

From our own Stop the Cap! investigation, both companies are partly correct.

We called Frontier this afternoon posing as a new FiOS customer in Ft. Wayne trying to sign up for television service.  The only option available, we were told, was satellite television service.  While Frontier was happy to sign us up for telephone and fiber broadband, the company representative told us she could not take our order for FiOS TV because, “it’s not available in your area.”

But Comcast’s claims about FiOS lack the very important detail that FiOS broadband and phone service will be offered by Frontier without any interruption — only television service appears to be at issue, and remains available to current customers.

We heard from several Ft. Wayne customers who are unhappy with Frontier’s handling of FiOS.

“While Comcast is being clever, the fact is Frontier wants TV customers to switch to satellite, which is simply a stupid idea,” says our reader Kevin.  “Why would I want a satellite dish when I have fiber.”

Lee, another Frontier customer, believes the company broke its promise of no rate increases after buying out Verizon’s local operations.

“They promptly raised the TV rate by around $30, and if you are a new FiOS customer, expect to pay hundreds and hundreds of dollars for installation,” he says.

Last week, Frontier’s deadline for Comcast to pull down the billboards passed, but as of today those billboards are still on full display.  Comcast’s response to Frontier?

“We received their letter.”

WANE-TV in Ft. Wayne updates viewers.  Frontier’s unilateral deadline for Comcast to pull down their billboards came and went.  The billboards are still there.  Now what? (2 minutes)

Phillip Dampier

This week, the tech community has been buzzing over new entrants in the world of cloud computing.  Apple’s iCloud in particular has sparked enormous media coverage as the company plans to encourage customers to access all of their favorite content over their broadband connection.  Apple is also moving towards online distribution of many of its software products, including the forthcoming OS X Lion operating system, suggesting consumers can pass up traditional physical media like CD-ROMs or DVDs.

Cloud storage theoretically allows you to store your entire music, video and photo collection online for easy access from any device.  Watching the 20-somethings buzz about 100GB+ secure file lockers and the end of traditional file storage as we know it has been amusing, but these people need to get their heads out of the clouds.  Unless they become politically involved in America’s broadband debate, it is not going to happen the way they hope it will.

Tech entrepreneur?  Meet broadband provider reality check: the Internet Overcharging usage cap and “excessive use” pricing scheme.

While Steve Jobs was introducing iCloud, broadband providers and their industry friends have been ruminating over the impact all of this new traffic will have on their broadband networks.  In an homage to former AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre’s “you can’t use my pipes for free,” the drumbeat for implementing “control measures” for cloud computing and video traffic has been amplified several times over by certain providers, Wall Street analysts, and their trade press and equipment supplier lackeys.

One alarmed provider pondered the impact of iCloud in terms of their past experience with iTunes, which also spiked traffic when it was first released.  Others balk at the notion of consumers using broadband platforms to move entire libraries of content back and forth, especially on wireless networks.  The only sigh of relief detected?  Apple won’t start iCloud with video content — just music, at least at first.

The enemies list

The biggest targets — the companies that get a lot of pushback from providers for using “their networks” to earn millions for themselves are Google, Netflix, Amazon and Apple.  Each of them are rapidly moving into the online entertainment business, threatening to provoke more cable TV cord-cutting.  Netflix is now responsible for 30 percent of online traffic during primetime hours, a fact that some use as an accusation — as if Netflix should be held to account for its own success. Amazon has opened its own cloud based music storage and is also increasingly getting into online video content streaming.  Apple has a novel approach at handling its forthcoming iCloud music feature which should save hours in uploading, but the company is also moving towards online distribution of a growing proportion of its software, including the huge bug fixes and upgrades that will easily exceed a gigabyte if you own several Apple products.

Google is a frequent Washington target and honestly delivers the only truly effective corporate pushback to anti-consumer broadband pricing some providers have contemplated.  In fact, Google is putting its money where its mouth is building a gigabit network larger providers repeatedly scoff at as unnecessary, too costly, and too complicated.

While millions in venture capital funds new online innovations, only a miniscule amount of money is being spent to counter the lobbying major providers are doing in Washington to redefine the broadband revolution in their terms, complete with usage pricing that bears no relation to cost, arbitrary usage limits, and ongoing lack of true competition.

Online innovation is grand, but allowing providers to strangle it with Internet Overcharging schemes guarantees to end the party real fast.

Individually, none of the new cloud services are likely to blow out usage caps in excess of 100GB, but in combination they certainly could.  Anyone using online file backup, cloud storage of video and large music collections, uses Netflix or other online streaming services, and spends lots of time on the web will easily approach the limits some providers have established.  That doesn’t even include large software updates.  Unless you have an unlimited usage plan on the wireless side, don’t even think about using most of these services with AT&T’s 2GB monthly wireless usage cap.

Glenn Britt: The Internet is a utility which is why we can keep raising the price.

In the handful of countries with ubiquitous Internet Overcharging, little of this will pose a problem — companies won’t launch cloud computing services in markets where usage caps will effectively keep customers from using them.

That is why it is critical for some of America’s largest technology companies to get on board the fight against Internet Overcharging, and demand Washington recognize broadband as a utility service that should be wide open and usage cap free.  The evidence is right in front of you.  Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt recognizes the fact broadband is an essential part of our lives today, which is why he is confident enough to keep raising the price and charging even more in the future.  It’s not about “network congestion,” “building the next generation of broadband,” or “pricing fairness.”  Stop the Cap! started at ground zero for Time Warner Cable’s 2009 version of “pricing fairness” — $150 a month for an unlimited use broadband account that likely cost major providers less than $10 a month to provide.  It’s about pure, naked profiteering, unchecked by free market competition in today’s broadband duopoly.

Unless a company like Google can vastly expand its own broadband rollouts, it is increasingly apparent to me (and many others), we may have to move towards an entirely different model for broadband in the United States — one built on the premise of the Interstate Highway System.  One advanced, publicly-owned fiber network open to all providers on which telecommunications services can travel to homes and businesses from coast to coast.

Nobody says private companies shouldn’t be able to compete, but every day more evidence arrives they will never be inclined to deliver the next generation of service that other countries around the world are starting to take for granted.  They will instead protect their current business models at all costs, even if that means throwing America’s broadband innovation revolution under the bus.

CNN takes a look at what makes Apple’s iCloud service different from competitors from Google and Amazon.  (5 minutes)

CNN talks with the folks at Dropbox about their cloud file storage system.  (3 minutes)

HissyFitWatch: When contract negotiations with the local cable company get a little too heated for comfort.

The city of Troy, N.Y. has lived with an expired franchise agreement with local cable company Time Warner Cable for more than a decade.  After a shouting match erupted between a city councilman and a city economic development coordinator over its renewal, now we know why.

City officials managed to complete a tentative renewal with the cable company back in March, subject to city council review.  The agreement comes even as Verizon’s FiOS fiber to the home network threatens to provide the cable company with some competition in the region.

As part of the renewal, Time Warner has agreed to provide $80,000 to fund a Digital Technology Lab at the Arts Center of the Capital Region. It will also front $70,000 to help construct a studio for a new government channel that will deliver coverage of city council meetings, which could draw some high ratings if tensions always run this high.

Troy also gets the right to collect the maximum franchise fee allowed by law and receives a $200,000 settlement to cover alleged franchise violations that occurred under the old agreement.

One of Time Warner Cable’s biggest skeptics on the city council is Councilman Bill Dunne, (D-District 4).  He’s heard complaints about Time Warner’s prices and service from his constituents for some time, and told The Record he is “cautiously optimistic” about the potential deal, but stressed it will not be approved by the council until it is thoroughly reviewed.

Dunne suspects the cable company has made a fortune off Troy residents for years, and he wants to closely examine how well the cable company has done in upstate New York before handing them a lengthy contract extension.

Troy, New York

“I would like to see an independent auditor open up the books on Time Warner Cable … to see exactly where the money is going and how much money is being made [from Troy cable subscribers],” he told the Troy newspaper.

Some residents suspect whatever Time Warner Cable “gives” the city as a result of contract negotiations will be quickly made back in future rate increases.

“These negotiations are a sham because Time Warner Cable is negotiating with our money,” Troy resident Bill Thompson tells Stop the Cap! “If they give the city $500,000, they’ll just raise our rates to get that money back.”

Thompson says he applauds Dunne’s skepticism, and believes bringing in competition from Verizon is the only way to keep prices in check.

Christopher, during happier times.

Dunne’s ongoing concerns about Time Warner caused a fracas during last Thursday’s city council meeting, when Dunne won approval to take the Time Warner Cable franchise renewal off the table.  In its place, Dunne’s new substitute resolution forming a working group to study the proposed franchise renewal and more importantly, perform an audit of Time Warner Cable and their supporting documents.

That decision infuriated Economic Development Coordinator Vic Christopher, who had been working with Time Warner Cable and the mayor’s office to push for a speedy approval of what he felt was a well-reviewed franchise renewal agreement. When Christopher objected to the study group, and delaying the agreement in general, Councilman Ken Zalewski (D-District 6) suggested he and the mayor’s office were representing the cable company more than city residents.

That did it.

As the meeting ended, a shouting match ensued between an offended Christopher, Zalewski, and Dunne. Christopher called the city council “obstructionists” and then followed up on his Twitter account accusing the council of talking everything to death. Dunne suggested Christopher should run for office if he didn’t like the way the council represented the interests of Troy residents.

“Christopher’s petulance was an amazing spectacle to watch, especially considering nobody was directly attacking him,” Thompson says.  “He took it as a personal attack and responded in kind, and it only reinforced the notion the mayor’s office was in a hurry to get this agreement signed.”

The hissyfit over a Time Warner Cable franchise agreement extension was caught on a cell phone camera, and the resulting video was promptly published online by The Record, Troy’s local newspaper. (1 minute)

TWC Franchise Agmt

Gov. Scott Walker’s administration in Wisconsin is under fire today for being allegedly caught blocking access to a website popular with protesters fighting the governor’s position on public unions.

Democratic party officials said that the website, www.defendwisconsin.org, run by the University of Wisconsin-Madison Teacher Assistants, was accessible after its launch last week until at least Friday.

But by Monday, the website organizers discovered the site was blocked for those using the state’s free Wi-Fi network available inside the Capitol building.  The website is used to coordinate protest actions and keep volunteers informed about the pushback campaign against the Walker Administration.

Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate says that the site was put on a blacklist typically used to filter out pornography sites so that protesters inside the Capitol could not access the site.

Former Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Charles Hoornstra said that, if Walker is blocking the website, it could be a violation of state and federal laws concerning free speech laws.

This isn’t the first time the state government has been accused of cutting off Internet access.  The Teaching Assistants Association earlier accused state authorities of cutting off Wi-Fi access to a room they had taken over as a headquarters inside of the Capitol.

Some of the activists in Madison used the occasion to draw comparisons with Internet shutdowns in Egypt and Libya. CNN picked up the story, taking it nationwide, and Sachin Chheda, a Democratic activist and former IT employee at the Capitol, said someone inside the government would have to consciously add the website to a blacklist for the software to block access.

The Walker Administration offered its own explanation of the blocked website, claiming the state’s software initially allows access to all websites until it is updated, then blocks sites until they are manually reviewed.

Department of Administration spokeswoman Carla Vigue said, “DOA’s security software automatically blocked the site, as it does all new websites.”

“No one here at DOA decided to block it or took action to do so,” he said. “The website is handled like any other website.”

Activists at the state Capitol tested Vigue’s explanation today, visiting newly registered domains with new websites, and had no trouble accessing any of them.

“The state got caught censoring and now they are making up stories to distract and deflect,” Paul Jeson tells Stop the Cap! “Since when does net nanny software require the manual review of every website in the world to unblock access — the whole point of the software is to arrive with a blacklist filter pre-installed and programming that checks content in real-time looking for triggers.”

Jeson says unless a protester exposed themselves in a photo republished on the site, there is no reason it should have been blocked.

“I doubt Gov. Walker himself ordered the block, but some of his associates treat the 1st Amendment as something worthy of defending only when it protects their point of view,” Jeson opines.  “Imagine what would happen if the Capitol Wi-Fi blocked Fox News or one of several anti-union, pro-Walker websites that popped up at the same time defendwisconsin.org was launched; I am not surprised none of those sites favorable to the governor’s position have complained about similar blocks.”

The governor’s office late in the day tried to change the subject.

“The Democratic Party should spend less time lying about Gov. Walker, and more time trying to get their AWOL State Senators back to Wisconsin,” said a statement released by the governor’s office.

CNN covered this statement from the Wisconsin Democratic Party on a poor telephone line. (1 minute)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.