Time Warner Cable’s decision to spend $11 billion to broadcast Los Angeles Lakers and Dodgers games at an estimated cost of $50-60 a year per subscriber is the subject of a class action lawsuit from fed up customers.

The plaintiffs are upset cable subscribers across Southern California will have to cover the cost of the 20-year deal with no option to opt-out of the sports channels because they are bundled into the most popular cable package.

The suit, filed this week in Superior Court alleges at least 60 percent of subscribers have no interest in the sports programming, but will collectively cover $6.6 billion of the deal and never watch a single game.

Time Warner Cable is also accused of forcing AT&T U-verse, Charter Cable, Cox Cable, DirecTV and Verizon FiOS to sign restrictive contracts that compel the companies to include the sports channels on the basic lineup.

Ironically, Time Warner Cable itself regularly complains about the increasing cost of programming and contract terms that force it to bundle expensive sports channels inside the basic tier instead of offering customers optional, added-cost sports programming packages.

Both sports teams are also named as defendants in the suit because they were aware that all subscribers would face rate increases as a result of the deal.

“TWC’s bundling results in Defendants making huge profits, much of which is extracted from unwilling consumers who have no opportunity to delete unwanted telecasts,” the complaint states.

The suit claims there is no legitimate reason Time Warner Cable and the sports teams could not have offered the new networks only to customers that wished to pay for them. The suit wants the bundling of the sports networks stopped and customers given refunds for the higher television bills that resulted.

Cablevision broadband customers are likely to see some new, faster upload speeds from the cable operator between now and sometime in July thanks to ongoing competition from Verizon FiOS.

Employees are informally telling Stop the Cap! the cable company has already dropped the “go-away” $300 installation fee for the company’s highest speed Ultra tiers and is set to formally introduce these packages this summer:

• Optimum Online Basic gets an upload speed boost. The 15Mbps download speed stays the same, but the 2Mbps upstream speed increases to 5Mbps;
• Optimum Online Boost will be retired. The 30/5Mbps service was Cablevision’s “turbo” tier, but now customers will be encouraged to consider faster packages;
• Optimum Online Boost Plus will be reintroduced as Optimum Ultra 50. The download speed remains 50Mbps, but upload speed is going up from 8Mbps to 25Mbps;
• Optimum Ultra also gets an upload speed boost. The 101/15Mbps tier becomes 101/35Mbps.

Courtesy: Sutheras

Cablevision did not get back to us in time to confirm the changes, but multiple sources have told us they are imminent.

Customers might appreciate the new speeds, but we’ve also heard from several readers Cablevision is now injecting ad banners into the browsing experience.

“I just started seeing advertisements for Optimum’s new website at the bottom of my screen, regardless of what web page I visit,” writes Dean Portew. “It just started happening and the ads disappear sometimes as quickly as they appear and Cablevision claims to not know anything about it.”

Reviewing the terms of service for Cablevision, the cable company doesn’t call it a web browser ad injection, they call it watermarking and to quote Det. Joe Fontana from the late Law & Order, “we’re authorized.”

32. Watermarking:

Subscriber understands and agrees that Cablevision may use “watermarking” techniques to message you about your account, Optimum services or for other communication purposes while using the Optimum Online Service. These “watermarks” may appear superimposed from time to time over portions of website pages you visit while using the Optimum Online Service, however, you understand and agree that this in no way indicates Cablevision’s approval of or responsibility for the content of such websites, which are solely the responsibility of the website operators and/or content providers. You further agree that you will not seek to hold Cablevision responsible in any way for any third party website content or the operation of any third party website accessed via the Optimum Online Service, or for the appearance of an Optimum “watermark” over a portion of any website.

A number of customers are not too happy about the intrusion, judging from an active discussion on DSL Reports’ Cablevision forum.

AT&T U-verse broadband has not kept up with the times, limiting speed-craving customers to a comparatively slow 18-24Mbps that hasn’t changed much in a few years. But an AT&T employee claims in the company forums that is all about to change, with new broadband speeds up to 48-60Mbps downstream and up to 10Mbps upstream on the way.

The improvements will not just mean faster Internet speeds, but also better television service. U-verse is an IP-based network using a DSL variant to deliver a broadband pipe into customer homes. That pipe is divided up between television, broadband, and phone service. Previously, U-verse limited television viewing to a handful of concurrent television streams — a problem in large households with heavy TV and DVR usage. The network upgrade won’t eliminate that problem, but it will make it more rare with up to six channels viewed simultaneously.

AT&T customers will also eventually benefit from a switch to “cloud storage” DVR equipment, which will record and store TV shows remotely and stream them back to your television on-demand. This will allow AT&T to sell customers different levels of storage capacity and reduce customer inconvenience should they lose all of their recordings if a hard drive happens to fail.

The employee predicts the speed increases will begin rolling out in July, beginning in Texas.

Not all markets or customers will be able to get the fastest speeds offered by AT&T because U-verse is still dependent on copper wire between a customer’s home or business and the nearest fiber optic link. AT&T intends to boost speeds for some customers using pair bonding to eke more performance from their aging wiring. Customers already buying U-verse’s top 24Mbps tier will receive a free upgrade to 30Mbps when the new speeds are introduced.

Some leaked pricing for the new speeds (discounts may apply in bundled packages):

• 3/1Mbps — $41
• 12/1.5Mbps — $51
• 18/1.5Mbps — $56
• 30/3Mbps — $66
• 45/6Mbps — $86
• 60/6Mbps — $106
• 75/10Mbps — $121

No word on if AT&T plans adjust its barely enforced U-verse usage cap (250GB).

West Virginia has spent nearly three times more than it anticipated for each mile of fiber optics being laid by Frontier Communications as part of the state’s taxpayer-funded broadband expansion project, according to a new report.

The Saturday Gazette-Mail reports that state officials originally planned to spend $17,000 for each mile of fiber cable laid to community institutions including schools and libraries. Instead, it is paying $47,500 per fiber mile, more than double the industry average of $20,000.

Frontier Communications is getting at least $45 million in taxpayer dollars towards construction costs and will end up owning the completed fiber network that won’t directly deliver broadband service to a single home or business in the state.

West Virginia will make use of a 675-mile institutional fiber network when the project is finished, 25 percent smaller than the 900-mile network originally proposed.

State officials including Homeland Security director Jimmy Gianato have come up with some novel defenses for the cost overruns, blaming:

• The 2011 Japanese earthquake/tsunami that allegedly spiked fiber prices to as much as $50,000 per mile;
• Superstorm Sandy which delayed the project and caused $14 million in damage;
• The cost of environmental impact studies.

The state is in a hurry to spend down the remaining funds left over from the $126.3 million taxpayer grant before they expire September 30. The broadband project has been mired in controversy from almost the beginning, including allegations that major telecom company employees serving as consultants steered project managers to invest in expensive, oversized routers intended to serve college campuses that ended up installed in tiny community libraries.

State officials also found many of the institutions slated to receive fiber upgrades already had fiber service. That left officials scrambling to find any schools, libraries, hospitals — even prisons where taxpayer-funded fiber broadband would prove useful.

In the end, Frontier will be the biggest beneficiary of the project and state officials predict $4-8 million will remain in unspent funds when the project is complete.

“If people step back, they can see this monstrosity in all its true glory,” says Jan Huntser. “Private companies like Frontier don’t want taxpayer money building public fiber networks for homes and businesses because that represents unfair competition. Instead, Frontier pockets taxpayer money to build a private fiber network they will end up owning that taxpayers cannot access. Instead, we’ll keep using their slow DSL service.”

Huntser says if taxpayer money is spent to build fiber networks, taxpayers ought to be able to use them.

“None of this makes any sense,” Huntser adds. “Frontier tells friends to buy a satellite dish for broadband because they will never offer it while a library in that town has four terminals and enough broadband equipment to support a business with hundreds of employees. They can’t even understand how to make it work, so they still rely on their DSL service to run the Wi-Fi connection instead.”

A law establishing a voluntary, national emergency alert system to give localized text warning messages to cell phone users about severe weather, terrorist attacks, natural disasters and missing children has generated conspiracy theories and complaints from some on the political right who suspect the system is designed to help President Obama promote his political agenda.

At issue are “Presidential Alert” text messages disseminated to cell phone users. For the Daily Caller, this was all too much:

To be fair, Obama’s texts are for big emergencies and stuff, like this:

“There is a big meteor hurtling to Earth that will kill us all!”

And this:

“Some folks in Washington are trying to stop me from saving helpless children with common sense gun control legislation, and also from giving you more free stuff. Help!”

Stop the Cap! has received more than 75 e-mail messages from concerned citizens that the “Obama Alerts” are the next stage of the “Kenyan Muslim Socialist Takeover of the U.S.,” to quote one message.

Why the alarm? This snarky article from Engadget did not help and riled up some on the right:

AT&T has begun rolling out Wireless Emergency Alerts updates for iPhone 4S and 5, so you won’t be the last folks to know if the entire northern hemisphere is about to be covered in ice à la Day After Tomorrow. You’ll receive a notification from the carrier when your update is ready, but only if you’re using iOS 6.1 or higher. Once installed, AMBER and Emergency alerts are automatically sent to your phone unless you switch them off via Settings, but you can’t disable Presidential alerts. WEA messages are always free of charge, so you don’t have to worry about going over your texting limit when notified that you need to get the hell out of dodge.

Missing from this week’s discussion was the total cost to taxpayers to enable the text alerts. The Warning, Alert and Response Network Act of 2006 allocated $106 million to study, develop, and enable the text message warnings now sent by almost every cell phone provider in the U.S.

Some cell phone customers may have already received warning messages, typically during severe weather events. The messages are sent free of charge and do not eat into your texting allowance.

Although the law could have better labeled “Presidential Alerts” as something less eyebrow-raising, such as “critical public service warnings,” the WARN Act does not enable the Obama Administration to begin sending short messages lobbying Americans for gun control.

They have Twitter accounts for that.

One more fact to consider: the WARN Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2006.