Congressman Eric Massa’s proposed Broadband Internet Fairness Act helped drum up sufficient attention to the issue of usage caps, it helped postpone them, at least in some areas.

One of the reasons these stories recapping and documenting this entire Internet rationing debacle is important is to come to understand Time Warner’s strategy in trying to implement usage caps.  It was largely the same talking points wherever you went among the four impacted communities, and the reaction from customers was also always the same – outrage.

Local governments also rapidly learned they had their own problem – a complete inability to force the company to do what’s right for customers.  In fact, communities that experienced this experiment, which is likely to return at some point in the near future, should begin contemplating competitive alternatives starting today, and not wait for the next hammer to fall on residential and business customers the next time Time Warner wants to drop a tiered billing system with extremely high overlimit fees on the towns and cities it serves.

KVUE presented a well-balanced story here, and it was a news leader, complete with a live stand-up shot in front of Austin’s City Hall.

After skeptical reviews from the media (and online groups like ours) about Time Warner’s original proposal to create broadband tiers that ended up not saving any customer a penny, the company quickly announced a 1GB slower tier for the light user. San Antonio learned about the plan in a brief report, but no details about the fact that exceeding that 1GB tier would cost your 200 pretty pennies for each gigabyte that followed.

The Rochester Democrat & Chronicle produces some edgy video targeted to younger people who probably aren’t getting home delivery of their newspaper everyday (shame on you), but are still plugged in to high technology issues.  So it didn’t take long for the paper to track down two young entrepreneurs running small businesses in the area who would be directly impacted by usage caps and punitive overlimit fees.  One, Justin Kirby, has been well known in the telecommunications circles I travel in for a very long time.  He’s out in Albion, a small town in Orleans county northwest of Rochester.  Albion is served by Time Warner for cable service, and Verizon for telephone.  It will be several years before Verizon FiOS ever reaches into the smaller towns well outside of the urban/suburban communities Verizon now targets for fiber optic cable.  DSL would likely be the next best choice, assuming it is available.

In rural areas, the impact on small business and residential customers is even greater, because these are the communities most unlikely to see robust competition from multiple providers.

DL.TV addressed the issue of bandwidth metering when Time Warner announced its earliest cap tests on Beaumont, Texas.  The parameters of the debate have largely remained unchanged since then.  A 40GB cap, still in place in Beaumont, doesn’t impact the casual web browser and e-mail reader.  But it takes out those who want to use the Internet to watch multimedia or download files.  Time Warner happens to be in the business of providing the former, which is what raised a lot of suspicion about the cap model.

The question ultimately comes down whether customers want Time Warner, or any other cable company for that matter, to effectively regulate through the wallet what people do with their online connection.

One guy is adamant about caps, the other looks like he could be victimized by Time Warner’s Re-Education efforts, because he assumes that customers are primarily using their connections for web browsing and e-mail.  However, the paradigm is starting to change as younger users get online.  What motivated our parents to get online will not be what motivates everyone going forward.