The trade association for independent cable systems trumpeted their belief that broadband usage caps and metered pricing was inevitable, and pointed to Sunflower Broadband as a perfect example of how metering can work in a community.

Sunflower, a podunk provider in the Lawrence, Kansas area has been sticking it to their customers for the last four years with tiers as low as 1GB of usage with $2 a GB in overlimit fees thereafter.  For Patrick Knorr, who works for Sunflower and is also ex-officio chair of ACA, life is good.  But the people of Lawrence think otherwise.  They’ve recognized they are stuck in a broadband backwater with Sunflower sticking it to them with very high prices and not so great service, but for a lot of folks, it’s their only choice.  AT&T offers DSL service without caps, but many people in Lawrence are not close enough to get good speed.  When living in a backwater this bad, people try and innovate, and the Lawrence Freenet was the result.  It’s a non-profit organization offering wi-fi access without Sunflower’s caps within Lawrence.

For smaller cities across America, the lack of competition nearly always equals high pricing for limited quality service.  Sunflower illustrates that in action.  In rural areas, equity of access to broadband at affordable prices is becoming a national issue.  Perhaps regulation may be the best answer when providers get out of hand.

The take-away message from this 30 second report is the confirmation that “thousands” of customers protested the cap experiment program.  We had not heard any actual numbers about how many people were in contact with Time Warner about this ordeal, but now we do. It goes into our library.

Local progressive blogger Tom Belknap gets six minutes of airtime on WHAM-TV’s morning show to expand on, and educate viewers about some of the ancillary issues surrounding the Time Warner usage cap experiment.  Belknap, who runs DragonFlyEye, also gets a chance to debunk some of the misunderstandings some people have about the cap issue, and also deals with conservatives who reflexively objected to Senator Charles Schumer’s involvement in the Time Warner debacle.

Metered billing with overlimit fees bring new perils to consumers opening their monthly bills.  Right now, some of these examples impact wireless carriers, which have usage caps and fees for exceeding them.  Now imagine your Time Warner bill being opened one day and you discover your son has been running a torrent service for half the country or your daughter watched several seasons of her favorite TV show, in HD.  ABC News documented six horror stories.

Alberto used his new wireless card to download a movie to his laptop while in Mexico.  “I downloaded the movie and they billed me for $62,000.00,” he said. After contesting the charge, the carrier reduced the fee — to a still painful $17,000.

Streaming live sporting events, excessive text messaging and exceeding monthly data allowances have left others with massive headaches and multi-thousand dollar bills.

Paul Eng, Web Editor for Consumers Union has advice for wireless account users that also falls neatly into place when contemplating a Time Warner usage cap:

Most of all, he said, if you’re not sure how much a certain activity will cost, it’s better to just say no to yourself.

“Resist temptation,” he said. “If you just have no clue, better safe than sorry.”

That’s right.  When in doubt, don’t even think about using it.

A Chicago Bear’s fan to the core, Wayne Burdick of Schaumburg, Ill., had to cheer on his team — even while on a Caribbean cruise.

So using his laptop, a wireless card and Slingbox device that let him watch the game via an Internet connection, he tuned into watch the Bears battle the Detroit Lions.

But after a nice relaxing vacation, he returned home to a $27,000 bill from AT&T.

In 2007, a 22-year-old Canadian oil-field worker faced an astronomical $83,700 (C$85,000) cell phone bill, according to Reuters.

According to Staniaszek’s father, who shares his name, the man thought he could use his phone as a modem for his computer. Thinking his unlimited browser plan with Bell Mobility (a division of Bell Canada) could handle it, he downloaded movies and other high-resolution files.

A Netbook with a wireless plan that hides the cap in the fine print. Result? $5000 Bill

Finally, there was the Oklahoma woman who grabbed one of those $99 Radio Shack netbook specials, with a two year contract for AT&T Wireless broadband.  AT&T is famous for pitching “unlimited” broadband access, but then caps it in the tiny fine print at 5GB per month, reserving the right to overcharge.  They did, to the tune of $5000 for one month.  She’s suing.

“The company still plans to bill by usage once people understand the concept.” As I explained to readers before, some of the most telling statements about the future of this entire debacle have come from the Triad division of Time Warner from North Carolina.  Company officials seem to be a little more forward about what is going on down there than in many of the other impacted divisions where we hear far more vague statements.

This is a quick report, but if you compare and contrast it with the News 14 Carolina reports, it’s easy to see the difference.  One report tells viewers customers weren’t happy with the experiment, the other did not.  One report has an anchor that steps back and reports the company position, the other is closer to a “team play” to press the company point of view.  And viewers absolutely picked up actual news from this report, instead of a recitation of talking points and press releases.