Comcast and Verizon are prepping to kick off a joint marketing effort in the northwest starting this week in Seattle and Portland, Ore., according to a report by the Philadelphia Inquirer.

The two companies will reportedly be selling each other’s products and services, with Comcast promoting Verizon Wireless services, while Verizon will be selling Comcast’s Xfinity products in Verizon stores. Comcast and Verizon will also be offering cross-company service bundles, inluding wireless, cable-TV, landline phone, and residential Internet services.

While the joint marketing effort will initially only take place in the midwest, Comcast senior vice president Cathy Avgiri said that the two plan on introducing bundled Comcast and Verizon services throughout the nation after the company has amply tested the waters in Oregon.

“We know that our customers want to stay connected no matter where they are. That’s why we’re offering a wireless deal with America’s best wireless carriers,” said Avgiris.

Eventually, Comcast and Verizon plan on introducing all-new products to stream content seamlessly between wireless and cable-TV/Internet platforms, explained Tony Heyman, president of integrated media services at Verizon Wireless.

What do you think of Comcast and Verizon’s new partnership?

Source: Philadelphia Inquirer

Comcast and Verizon kicking off joint marketing effort in Northwest is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast, provider of cable television, high speed Internet, and telephone service, announced that customers with an iPad and have the Xfinity HD Triple Play service, can now watch live TV via their device.

Unfortunately, it’s currently only available for customers in Denver and Nashville, though the company is looking to be expanding the service into many more markets in the following months.

As is usually the case with new services, companies like to start a launch small to iron out any issues, bugs, as well as improve the service thanks to customer feedback, and then launch on a much larger scale once things are out of a “beta period” so to speak.

The service from Comcast is named ‘AnyPlay” which is quite fitting. It’s available for no charge to customers with the service mentioned above.

From Apple Insider:

“AnyPlay is only available for users who access the Internet on their home Wi-Fi connection. Outside of the home or over 3G, the Xfinity TV application allows users to access On Demand content, including 8,000 hours of movies and TV shows.”

“The new AnyPlay functionality is currently only available on the iPad, though support for the Motorola Xoom tablet is coming “very soon.” Using the service, users will be able to watch a show separate from what someone else might currently be watching on the TV.”

It’s interesting to note that other tablet support wasn’t mentioned or expected, besides the Xoom of course. Users should keep in mind that since this AnyPlay service is using their home wifi connection, the monthly Internet data cap still applies.

Live TV Via iPad Available Now For Comcast Customers is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast XFinity TV and Disney-ABC customers will be gaining access to much more content, as the two companies have entered into a very wide-ranging deal.

Notable for being Disney-ABC’s first authentication deal, the agreement covers more than 70 channels under that particular corporate umbrella. It also bears mentioning that at this point, ten years is a very, very long commitment in streaming, at a time when many companies feel that the value of such deals might still be very fluid and subject to large fluctuations.

In addition to local affiliates and some HD versions of many of the channels, the deal will allow customers to view content from ABC, ABC Family, Disney Channel, Disney XD, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Deportes, ESPNEWS, ESPN Classic, ESPN Goal Line, ESPN Buzzer Beater, ESPN 3D, ESPN GamePlan, ESPN FullCourt and ESPN3 across several types of devices.

Both sides issued statements trumpeting the massive deal, and Comcast’s president and CEO Neil Smit said:

“We are very pleased to have reached this unprecedented and innovative, long-term agreement with Disney which embraces the future of entertainment and allows Comcast to continue to bring our vision of TV Everywhere to Xfinity customers whether at home or on the go.”

Smit added:

“Comcast was the first video provider to create technology that enabled us to deliver content to customers where and when they want it across any viewing experience.”

Co-chair of Disney, Anne Sweeney, commented:

“This landmark deal is a great example of what can be achieved when programmers and distributors collaborate and innovate together to meet the ever-evolving needs of consumers and enhance the viewing experience.”

Have you been waiting for more Disney-ABC content to be available on your mobile device? Are you a Comcast subscriber with an iPad or other mobile streaming device?

Comcast, Disney Hammer Out Ten-Year Deal For Multi-Platform Viewing is a post from: The Inquisitr

There has been a lot of noise made about how ISP like Comcast and others need to institute caps on their service and what caps they do put in place are more than fair. This is a point of view that I have personally argued against in many places as being detrimental in the long run for technology as a whole. One of the points I have made is that even Comcast’s cap of 250 GB would end up being to small in this day and age of increasing streaming of video and the push to live in the cloud it would become quite apparent just how small it is.

Well we have a story today out of Seattle about game consultant Andre Vrignaud who suddenly found himself without any internet service from Comcast because he had gone over the 250 GB cap not once but twice. Here’s the really bad part though – Andre is now banned from the Internet for a year due to this so-called transgression; and to add insult to injury Comcast blamed him for misusing his internet access.

So what lead to this transgression?

Well as Andre wrote in his first post on the matter:

This stuff is valuable to me, and I recently purchased a three-year subscription to Carbonite so I could back all of this content up to the cloud. I also recently saw Amazon’s announcement of being able to upload unlimited M4A/AAC tracks to their Cloud Drive service, and decided to upload my library there so I could access it when on the road. And it turns out uploading all of this content to the cloud triggered Comcast’s bandwidth cap and caused me to be cut off from the internet – again. It was never clear to me that Comcast measures both upload and download bandwidth, and I suspect many people are going to be surprised by this in the coming years, especially as the cloud continues to become more and more a part of our lives.

In other words Andre was using the web the way that we are all being told that we should be using it but as he found out the hard way that 250 GB cap that Comcast has on it top tier consumer access counts the traffic both ways – up and down.

Now more than a few people have pointed out that Andre should have been using the business class service from Comcast which doesn’t have caps but does have its own inherent gotchas as Andre pointed out in a follow up post

Looking forward, I’ll first say that I’d be hesitant to use Comcast for anything ever again for obvious reasons. However, the marketplace really isn’t competitive in Seattle for what I define as highspeed (>10 Mbps) broadband – Comcast is the only real gig in town. So I decided to look into what a Business plan would cost me if I were to choose that option.

Comcast Business has four plans:

• Deluxe 100/10 – 100 Mb down/10 Mb up for $395 a month
• Deluxe 50/10 – 50 Mb down/10 Mb up for $195 a month
• Premium 22/5 – 22 Mb down/5 Mb up for $105 a month
• Starter 12/2 – 12 Mb down/2 Mb up for $65 a month

The only plan that’s even close to my $60/month 15 Mb up consumer plan is the Starter 12/2 plan for $65 a month. So at first blush I’d be paying slightly more for slightly less speed, but no data caps.

But wait – it’s “new service” with “specialized hardware”, so they can’t just turn on the plan. Instead I have to choose from a plan commitment tier. If I commit for the shortest period of time (one year), my install/setup fee is $199. If I go and commit to three years with Comcast Business, they’ll reduce that fee down to $49.

All right – so let’s discuss what the hardware is. The sales rep suggested that no matter what tier I really want I start with the Deluxe 100/50 plan so I get the “higher-end hardware” – which I can keep even if I call and downgrade to a different tier the day after the install. That set my spideysense off, and so I pushed a little bit on what exactly this “higher-end” hardware is. Turns out it’s a DOCSIS 3.0 modem. Ok… but I already own my own modem, a Motorola SURFboard eXtreme Broadband Cable Modem-SB6120, and I don’t want to lease another.

Sorry, that’s not an option.

But it doesn’t end there either:

Now, let’s say all this hasn’t put me off from coming on board, and I want to sign up for the Starter plan and pay more for less service, all to remove an arbitrary data cap. Can I?

Nope! Turns out that once Comcast has cut your broadband account for violating their data cap policy you are verboten from being a Comcast customer for 1 year. That’s right:

After being cut off from Comcast’s consumer internet plan due to using too much data, I’m told I’m ineligible to use Comcast’s recommended solution, their business internet plan that allows the unlimited use of data — solely because I made the mistake of actually using “too much” data in the first place.

As the sales rep said in my Google Voicemail message, “what’s interesting is that if you would have started off on the business side of the house, since we don’t have a cap limitations [sic] you would’ve been fine.”

Fascinating.

Now, explain to me how caps are a benefit to anyone but the companies seeking to increase their bottom line without doing anything to make the service better for the consumer.

Comcast boots game consultant from the Web is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast customers will soon have the option to make HD video calls directly from their TV via Skype capabilities.

At this time Skype and Comcast are mum on the details of the partnership including release dates and pricing.

The service could be a boom for Skype with Comcast already offering digital phone services to more than 8.5 million customers, while Skype’s own service gaining popularity everyday and an increasing number of TV’s arriving to market with built-in cameras.

According to the announcement the service will require a monthly fee, an adapter box and a camera mount for TV’s without built-in cameras. Just like the current Skype setup no additional fees will be assessed for national calling.

According to the Seattle Times the service will start with 720P and then eventually move up to 1080P HDTV quality video chatting. The service will also require a 1.5 megabits per second download connection, which not surprisingly Comcast offers to their customer base.

Comcast Teams With Skype, Offers HD Calling For Televisions is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast has added to their traditional communications services by announcing the Xfinity Home Security service in six of the company’s current available markets.

The system allows users to order basic home security monitoring, remote lighting control, video surveillance and monitoring and remote controls for digital thermostat setups.

The program can be accessed by using free iOS and Android app and through internet browser based options.

Comcast is offering basic service for $40 per month, while cameras and digital options will increase the price.

Xfinity Home Security is first launching in Philadelphia, Portland, Jacksonville, Sarasota/Naples, Florida and Chattanooga and Nashville, Tennessee.

[via SlashGear]

Comcast Debuts “Xfinity Home Security” With Plenty Of Options is a post from: The Inquisitr

There was a rush of stories this morning about how Comcast was blocking access to The Pirate Bay website, which was followed by cries of commendation.

Well it turns out that everyone was getting their panties all twisted up for no reason. Except the only problem was that Comcast wasn’t blocking access as told to TorrentFreak

This morning we wrote an article on the issue, mentioning that The Pirate Bay was trying to find the origin of the problem.

The report didn’t go unnoticed by Comcast either. In a response to the issue Jason Livingood, Executive Director Internet Systems Engineering at Comcast, told TorrentFreak: “Please note that we do not block websites and we are NOT blocking The Pirate Bay.”

Not only wasn’t Comcast blocking The Pirate Bay but it turns out that they put out a call to the people running the site to offer their help in tracking down exactly what was the problem.

Comcast has reached out to The Pirate Bay and set aside resources in case the BitTorrent site needs it. “I can have our engineers work directly with them to assist,” Jason Livingood told TorrentFreak.

So much for Comcast being the bad guy here for a change. They actually turned out to be extremely helpful and along with The Pirate Bay traced the problem to one of the Tier1 network providers.

Comcast reached out to Serious Tubes Networks, who deliver transit to The Pirate Bay, and they were able to correct the issue.

“Comcast emailed our NOC about their users complaining about not reaching The Pirate Bay. We resolved the issue and TPB can now be reached from ComCast,” the CEO of Serious Tubes Networks told TorrentFreak.

Be careful there or you’ll be damaging you rep of being a heartless money grubbing corp.

Hell freezes over at the news Comcast helps The Pirate Bay is a post from: The Inquisitr

Now that’s a nice bonus for a job well done.

It seems that FCC Comminsioner Meriedith Attwell Baker has left the FCC for a new job.

With who you ask?

Well as amazing as it might seems she is now employed as, or will be as soon as her term is up, a lobbyist for .. wait for it … yup … you guessed it – Comcast.

Not only did she approve the deal but apparently she also did her best to defend Comcast from any attempts by the FCC to impose further restrictions and conditions on the merger.

“At the time, Baker objected to FCC attempts to impose conditions on the deal and argued that the ‘complex and significant transaction’ could ‘bring exciting benefits to consumers that outweigh potential harms.’”

via Ars Technica

Baker’s title at Comcast when she joins will be Senior Vice President of Government Affairs, and most likely a nice raise in pay from her inflated government check.

Wonder if she got a signing bonus as well?

FCC bureaucrat joins Comcast after helping approve NBC merger is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast and Clearwire on Friday announced a new deal that users will love. The company’s have teamed up to offer the XFinity 3G/4G MiFi adapter for just $25. The adapter, the same one offered as the Novatel 3G/4G MiFi adapter on Sprint can be purchase for the $25 price point if users are willing to sign a one-year contract.

The best news? The cost of ownership is just $40 per month for the same Clearwire service that Sprint Wireless charges $50 to use. While the adapter is far cheaper than the $80 price tag on the Now Network.

Marketed under the Comcast Internet 2go program it’s a deal worth taking a closer look at.

Clearwire Teams Up With Comcast, Offers $25 XFinity 3G/4G MiFi is a post from: The Inquisitr

Throughout his tenure as a senator Al Franken has made media consolidation and network neutrality his signature platforms and he definitely isn’t happy with the Comcast and NBC deal, which passed through the FCC and DoJ yesterday.

During his speech, which was happening at the same time that the FCC announcement approving the deal was made, Senator Franken said among other things that the decision “will create essentially two Internets.” He also believes that we will see a direct move by the combined company to try and shut down Netflix.

When it comes to the Comcast merger, Franken was even more vocal. “As you probably know, I hate this merger,” he told the group. Not only will it raises prices on TV subscriptions, it will give the combined entity incredible power to stifle competition from online sources like Netflix.

“I’m hearing that Comcast is already preparing to pull NBC Universal’s programming from Netflix when it’s next up for review,” Franken said. The cable industry is worried about the threat from cheaper options like Netflix; “they aren’t stupid and they want to shut it down.”

via Ars Technica

Here is a video of his speech for those interested.

Senator Franken: Comcast deal bad for consumers and the Internet is a post from: The Inquisitr

So the big gets bigger as the Comcast deal to buy NBC passes through the FCC and the Justice Department.

In a 4 – 1 vote the FCC approved the deal but not without FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski pushing for some strong regulation, such as forbidding Comcast from cutting sweetheart deals when it comes to NBC content; or the prioritizing of its video traffic on its pipes.

While we are still waiting to see what the final rulings will be the one negative vote came from Commissioner Michael Copps who said that the deal “opens the door to the cable-ization of the open Internet”.

For those of you interested there is apparently going to be conference call at 4 PM which I am sure will be well covered by tech blogs.

In the meantime all I can say about this is that this isn’t going to end well for the consumer.

Here is the complete press release for the deal courtesy of Engadget:

COMCAST AND GE RECEIVE REGULATORY CLEARANCE FOR
NBC UNIVERSAL TRANSACTION

PHILADELPHIA, PA, AND FAIRFIELD, CT – January 18, 2011 – Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) and General Electric (NYSE: GE) announced today that they have received regulatory clearance from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Department of Justice for the joint venture that will consist of the NBC Universal businesses and Comcast’s cable networks, regional sports networks and certain digital properties. The joint venture will be 51 percent owned by Comcast, 49 percent owned by GE and managed by Comcast. The transaction is expected to be completed by the end of January.

“This is a proud and exciting day for Comcast,” said Brian L. Roberts, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Comcast. “We are grateful for the leadership of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney, the other FCC Commissioners and their staffs for the months of hard work that went into reviewing an unprecedented number of documents and public comments.”

“The NBC Universal joint venture will be well positioned to compete, innovate, and bring new choices to consumers,” Mr. Roberts continued. “Our original vision for the combination remains intact so that consumers will benefit, and our competitors will be treated fairly. We are pleased that many of the voluntary commitments we proposed beginning the day the transaction was announced and continuing throughout the process have been incorporated into the FCC’s Order.”

Under the terms of the transaction, GE will contribute to the joint venture NBC Universal’s businesses, including its cable networks, filmed entertainment, televised entertainment, theme parks and unconsolidated investments. Comcast will contribute its cable networks, including E!, Versus and the Golf Channel, its regional sports networks and certain digital media properties, and make a payment to GE subject to certain adjustments based on various events between signing and closing.

GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt said, “NBCU has been a great business for GE over the past 20 years, generating an average annual return of 11 percent. Reducing our ownership stake from 80 percent to 49 percent allows GE to continue sharing in NBCU’s growth while also providing significant cash to invest in our high-technology infrastructure businesses, growing an attractive dividend, and continuing our buyback program. This transaction will have generated approximately $8 billion of cash at closing with an expected small after-tax gain. We are confident the NBCU team will continue to be in good hands under Brian Roberts, Steve Burke and the Comcast team’s leadership.”

“Bringing the legendary assets of NBC Universal together with the content assets and technology expertise of Comcast will create many new opportunities for consumers. The combination of these assets will allow us to bring the future of anytime, anywhere media faster to consumers in America and around the globe,” said Steve Burke, who will become Chief Executive Officer of NBC Universal at the official close of the transaction.

Additional information regarding the transaction can be found at www.comcast.com/nbcutransaction.

About Comcast Corporation
Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) (www.comcast.com) is one of the nation’s leading providers of entertainment, information and communication products and services. With 22.9 million video customers, 16.7 million high-speed Internet customers, and 8.4 million Comcast Digital Voice customers, Comcast is principally involved in the development, management and operation of cable systems and in the delivery of programming content.

Comcast’s content networks and investments include E! Entertainment Television, Style Network, Golf Channel, VERSUS, G4, PBS KIDS Sprout, TV One, regional sports networks operated by Comcast Sports Group and Comcast Interactive Media, which develops and operates Comcast’s Internet businesses, including Comcast.net (www.comcast.net). Comcast also has a majority ownership in Comcast-Spectacor, which owns two professional sports teams, the Philadelphia 76ers NBA basketball team and the Philadelphia Flyers NHL hockey team, and a large, multipurpose arena in Philadelphia, the Wells Fargo Center, and, through Global Spectrum, manages other facilities for sporting events, concerts and other events.

About GE
GE (NYSE: GE) is a diversified infrastructure, finance and media company taking on the world’s toughest challenges. From aircraft engines and power generation to financial services, health care solutions and television programming, GE operates in more than 100 countries and employs about 300,000 people worldwide. For more information, visit the company’s website at www.ge.com.

Caution Concerning Forward-Looking Statements:
This release contains “forward-looking statements” – that is, statements related to future, not past, events. In this context, forward-looking statements often address expected future business and financial performance and financial condition, and often contain words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “seek,” “see,” or “will.” Forward-looking statements by their nature address matters that are, to different degrees, uncertain. These statements are made on the basis of the views and assumptions of management. Particular uncertainties that could cause actual results to be materially different than those expressed in these forward-looking statements include: the timing of the closing of the transaction; adverse developments in the business and operations of NBC Universal, including potential disruption that may make it more difficult to maintain business and operational relationships; the successful combination, operation and overall performance of the joint venture post closing; the ability to integrate the programming assets of Comcast and NBC Universal in the new joint venture; the ability of the new joint venture to create popular programming, to develop new digital products and services, and to succeed in the highly competitive media industry; the ability of the new joint venture to generate attractive financial returns and strong cash flows; and, the effect of any conditions that regulators have imposed in permitting the transaction to proceed. These uncertainties may cause actual future results to be materially different than those expressed in these forward-looking statements. None of GE, Comcast nor NBC Universal undertake to update these forward looking statements.

Comcast purchase of NBC a done deal is a post from: The Inquisitr

We all know that Comcast really, really, wants this purchase of NBC to go through. The question is though what are they willing to do in order to help along the process through the various regulatory hearings it is bound to face?

Well it turns out they are willing to pay … errrr …. donate a lot of money to Congressional Representatives. According to the Intellectual Property Watch site 84 of 97 of the Reps received money from Comcast in amounts ranging from $1,000 up to $25,000.

OpenSecrets.org has the complete list of who received money and how much, with a larger percentage going to Democrats.

I think we can be pretty sure that the deal will go through.

Buying Congressional favoritism to support Comcast/NBC merger is a post from: The Inquisitr

If the merger of Comcast and NBC is approved by the FCC it may put in place a 7 year agreement which will ensure that the newly formed company can not throttle the internet speeds of competitors or prioritize their own services for faster internet speeds, sites that including NBC.com and Hulu among various other offerings.

Under the proposed plan the company would also be forbidden for using any type of set-top boxes or other hardware to send customers away from their competitors and towards their own content.

Under the new neutrality rules, the company’s own cap of 250GB/month would have to apply to their own content just as it does with other content.

The terms, while not released in full are expected to be announced by the FCC, Comcast or NBC in the next several days.

Comcast-NBC Merger Could Force 7 Year Net Neutrality Agreement is a post from: The Inquisitr

Comcast really wants to merge with NBC and to make that happen they are attempting to sweeten the deal by sending a letter to the FCC in which they state that they might move forward with plans to roll out low-cost broadband internet access, should the merger be allowed to move forward.  Yeah I don’t like the sound of might in their statement either.

ComCast says in their letter that they might provide “some” households with Economy speeds at a cost of just $10 per month, however those users must make under $20,000 per year, so basically be under the poverty level. There would also have to be one child in the home that is in the No Child Left Behind program. Basically people who can’t afford computers can get cheap internet, good going ComCast.

ComCast also mentions in their letter that they would be able to cover an additional 400,000 homes in the next three years as part of their expansion, an increase of just 2.3% in comparison to their current number of households covered.

It’s still unclear if the proposal will be accepted by the FCC. [via Electronista]

ComCast May Offer Low-Cost Broadband, If NBC Merger Is Secured is a post from: The Inquisitr

More than once I have said that broadband providers need to stop being content providers and become dumb pipe providers. The moment that you mix the two together you automatically have a conflict of interest where, in the long run, the consumer loses.

The Internet is provider agnostic, as it should be, but when companies like Comcast, TimeWarner, AT&T Uverse, or any of the other big players start having a say over what will go over their pipes and at what speeds the two services are diametrically opposed.

As frustrating to the consumer as this can be there is another answer for broadband service and it is one that is really starting to spread.

The answer: your hometown broadband provider.

While there have been efforts in the past of the creation of local broadband services it has faced incredibly stiff, and well lobbied, opposition from the big incumbents in the business. They have even gone to the courts to try and protect their lock on the broadband landscape. Then if the courts don’t play nice you act like TimeWarner and lobby state legislatures like they did in North Carolina.

Interestingly enough though this time around TimeWarner lost and little ol’ Wilson N.C. can continue building out its own broadband service that is 10 times faster than TimeWarner’s own top tier service of 10Mbps. In a move to add insult onto injury Wilson N.C. basic service of 10Mbps is cheaper than anything TimeWarner offers.

From Craig Settles at GigaOM we hear about the city of Chattanooga, Tennessee, and their citywide service of 150 Mbps

Chattanooga, Tenn. is rolling out a citywide network that delivers 150 Mbps to customers. Today. Not five or ten years down the road. “Our employees designed the network,” said Lacie Newton, spokesperson for EPB, Chattanooga’s public utility. “Along with contracted employees from private companies they are building and operating the network. No doubt there are others capable of providing advanced communication services. But unless we did it ourselves, we didn’t believe that others would bring these type services to every home and business in our community.”

Then we have Santa Monica, who with no money in the budget but with cannibalized saving from updating old technology, where they upgraded their fiber system, sold local businesses broadband services the big competitors couldn’t (or wouldn’t) match, and are now expanding with the help of a $2.5 million capital fund they built up.

Right now the FCC is is trying to promote its vision of 100Mbps service to  100 million homes by 2020 the problem is that they are trying to do it either by government intervention or by twisting the arm of the broadband incumbents. As we have seen in the past this doesn’t work as companies like Comcast or TimeWarner have no qualms of throwing massive amounts of money at the problem and in most cases come out on top.

Given that there are already a large number of communities that are currently, or in the planning stages of running their own broadband services it would make much better sense for the FCC to throw its weight behind them. After all taking on the big company incumbents who will fight them all the way is not an inexpensive proposition.

More importantly though is the support, both in money and time, that we could give our local providers since it is in both our interests to have access to better service at a reasonable price. So since we aren’t, and will likely never get it from the big boys maybe its time to switch tactics and take the fight to them.

Broadband in America: Is it time to think small? is a post from: The Inquisitr

In a move that I am sure will make the shareholders proud The Consumerist blog has handed the title of The Worst Company in America to Comcast – the cable company that everyone loves to hate even if they don’t use them. Yes folks the highly coveted Golden Poo statute is on it’s way to Comcast Headquarters in the City of Brotherly where is will most like receive the adulation it deserves.

From the announcement by The Consumerist

After four rounds of bloody battle against some of the most publicly reviled businesses in America, Comcast can now run up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and hold its hands high in victory — it has bested everyone else to earn the title of Worst Company In America for 2010.

In a three-day, knock-down, drag-out bout with Ticket “Apollo Creed” Master, the little cable company that could showed just how badly their horrendous service, exorbitant costs, throttled internet and plans to acquire NBC Universal have ticked the Consumerist readers

Congratulation Comcast it is a well deserved recognition of your company.

Comcast gets named The Worst Company in America is a post from: The Inquisitr

Are you ready to be glued to the edge of your seat as you watch the fast paced game of golf in 3D? Okay maybe that’s a stretch, but Comcast has just switched on their new 3D channel (within the last 24 hours) and it’s ready to take on the Masters Tournament.

The events 3D programming begins later today and you’ll need a 3D compatible TV and glasses to go along with that television.

Engadget captured the screenshot shown above from someone in Chicago, however the programming is already being offered in San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Denver, Twin Cities, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington D.C., Atlanta, Miami, and Indianapolis.

If TV programming shows the ball as it flies towards the camera it may be worth a closer watch, but I really don’t want to see Tiger Woods up close and personal, that’s happened with enough people already. Also, why is there only 2 hours of programming, that’s basically just a Comcast tease. [Engadget]

Comcast Rolls Out 3D Programming, Just In Time For The Exciting World Of Golf is a post from: The Inquisitr

It would be the biggest geek impossible dream but it is an idea I had that could potentially stop the current crop of broadband providers dead in their tracks.

In light of the news that the FCC lost in court to Comcast there is a big fear, and well justified in my opinion, that this will now open up the floodgates of consumer abuse by Comcast and other providers. After all it’s not like that haven’t asked us to pass the Vaseline before.

This got me thinking if there were any alternatives for keeping these companies in check and actually doing things to make access to the Internet less of an increasing expense and at the same time remove any threats of favoritism aka payola for some sites over others.

Unfortunately the next part of this post is pure and utter fantasy because as much as such an idea actually come to fruition is unlikely to happen it sure would shake up the broadband provider business.

I have said on more than one occasion that for real net neutrality broadband providers have to be providers of the dumb pipe. Nothing more and nothing less. The moment you add in any other kind of profit oriented business that depends on the web there is an inherent prejudice and need to constantly increase prices.

So who could provide that dumb pipe?

Well truthfully anyone of the current big boys of the broadband business could be but chances are they would face a shareholder revolt. It’s okay to screw the consumer as long as the shareholders are getting their pound of flesh and the top management is getting their multi-million dollar payouts.

Who has the most to gain from a cheap and ubiquitous Web?

Let’s see .. how about Microsoft? Or Google? And let’s not forget Apple.

These three giants of computing have the most to gain .. and to lose .. from a possible preferential and expensive Web. Just as companies like Comcast have no compunction in giving the consumer the shaft they won’t have any problem holding web companies hostage. A good hint at this was the recent spat between ABC and Cablevision where the television network wanted more money and Cablevision said no. Guess who blinked first?

In the case of the Web it could just as easily happen that Comcast or anyone, or all for that matter, says to Google or Apple that they want money from the companies in exchange for preferential service . The threat being that if they don’t pay up those companies could find themselves with increasing bottlenecks and other related network problems.

Think that this wouldn’t happen? Think again.

Now between the three companies they have a total of $89 Billion sitting in their warchests (MS – $45B, Apple – $25B, Google – $22B – figures based on 2009 and 2008 information). That kind of money tends to talk volumes and even the threat of utilizing part of it to fund an alternative to our current choices of broadband providers would be enough to give Comcast and the others great pause.

This kind of project can’t work if only one company decides to give it a shot regardless of what Google thinks. It also can’t work if only two companies decide to go down that road. No, this would require all three (or possibly more if you throw in Intel or say HP) to work in unison to even get the idea off the ground. It would also have to be a case of where all participants in such an idea would always be on equal footing with the other members.

At some point for the Internet to truly be a world changer access has to be dirt cheap and available from anywhere in the world on any kind of device. There are a lot of countries that believe this but unfortunately neither the US or Canada is one of those countries. If we really want to see transformative technologies like we have never seen before the time of treating Internet access as an endless ATM machine has to come to an end.

Unfortunately none of the major broadband providers in the US or Canada so any inclination to this into consideration. The end result of this is that both countries are inevitably going to find themselves sliding down the ladder of technology and the ability to contribute to real change in the world.

It doesn’t have to be this way and maybe it will take companies like Google, like Microsoft and like Apple joining together to even have the possibility of this happening.

But like I said .. it’s a pipe dream. A nice delusional dream but a dream all the same.

One possibility for true net neutrality is a post from: The Inquisitr

Amazingly there is other news that just the constant and increasingly boring iPad stories.

That is if the fact that the FCC lost in the courts to Comcast is of interest as you tear yourself away from the App Store and put your wallet away. The general consensus is that it is a good thing that the FCC did lose because it is felt that the Commission was overstepping its bounds when it came to the Internet.

From Paul Levinson

Of the two manifest evils – government regulation of the Internet vs. corporate domination – government regulation is far worse and dangerous. It’s an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment. Government insistence on any mode of behavior carries with it the threat of arrest and imprisonment and force of arms against those who are not in compliance. The worst that a corporation can do is take your money. Not good, but not as bad as the worst that the government can do.

Mike Masnick at Techdirt

Lots of people seem upset by this, but they should not be. This is the right decision. The FCC was clearly going beyond its mandate, as it has no mandate to regulate the internet in this manner. In fact, what amazed us throughout this whole discussion was that it was the same groups that insisted the FCC had no mandate over the broadcast flag, that suddenly insisted it did have a mandate over net neutrality. You can’t have it both ways (nor should you want to). Even if you believe net neutrality is important, allowing the FCC to overstep its defined boundaries is not the best way to deal with it. So for those of you upset by this ruling, look at it a little more closely, and be happy that the FCC has been held back from expanding its own mandate. Otherwise, the next time the FCC tried to do something like the broadcast flag or suddenly decided it could enforce “three strikes,” you’d have little argument.

Jeff Jarvis adds

I’ve amended my proposed Bill of Rights in Cyberspace thanks to a suggestion in the comments from Jeff Sonderman: All data are created equal. I made that all bits are created equal, which broadens it somewhat and is quite relevant today in the discussion of net neutrality that will explode because of an Appeals Court decision in Washington that told the FCC it did not have jurisdiction to tell Comcast to stop discriminating on bits.

Here’s the rub: On the one hand, I do not want government regulation of the internet. On the other hand, I do not want monopoly discrimination against bits on the internet. I see it as a principle that all bits are, indeed, created equal. But how is this enforced when internet service is provided by monopolies? Regulation. But I don’t want regulation. But… That is the vicious cycle of the net neutrality debate.

Now as much as I, like Jeff Jarvis, would really like to see “Internet Equality” as a shining beacon the reality of the situation now and the road going forward is entirely different. Jarvis likes to point to the fact that all bits should be treated equal when in actuality it is the farthest thing from the truth. Broadband providers would like to have us believe that Internet phone service is different from web access and content delivery and is different yet again from television delivered over the net for which they charge us three different prices.

Can we say double-dipping or maybe more appropriately triple-dipping?

Any digital data that travels over any kind of delivery system is all the same ones and zeros. There is no difference as far as the pipe is concerned folks no matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise.

That is the most basic principal of what everyone calls Net Neutrality – all the bits in the pipe are the same. There is no telephone bits, no television bits and no Internet bits.

The problem that the broadband providers have if this argument becomes the accepted norm is that they then can’t charge us the consumers three different fees and different rates based on some illusion of there being any differences. They also can’t cry wolf when they claim that video is killing their networks because those video bits are the same ones and zeros that make up the phone or television bits.

Up until now though Comcast and the other major broadband providers have been held in check by the mere threat of FCC intervention. They’ve had to play nice with the consumer and make it appear as if that they are benign gatekeepers but don’t kid yourself they are only bidding their time and today’s court decision will have far reaching consequences. Consequences that the consumer is going to be on the receiving end of.

Don’t get me wrong I am really hesitant of any government agencies getting involved with any type of regulation of the Internet. We only have to look to France and England to see where that road leads. However if anyone thinks that Comcast and other providers aren’t popping the champagne corks over this announcement .. well .. you’re a fool.

And trust me – we’ll be paying for all that champagne .. one way or another.

That sound of a cash register going cha-ching – it’s just Comcast celebrating FCC loss is a post from: The Inquisitr

The time frame of this could shift to 2011 depending on how long it takes for all the details to be worked out but be assured that when the Comcast purchase of NBC goes ahead the consumer is is going to get the short end of the stick – a very short stick.

Now to be honest when I first heard of the plan for Comcast to buy NBC my initial reaction was that it was an exceedingly stupid idea but that was pretty well the end of it. Then I was reading a post by Chez at Dues Ex Malcontent that pointed to a post by Josh Silvers at Huffington Post that took a look at this pending deal and didn’t like what he saw.

While he makes four major points in his argument as to why this isn’t a good idea, it is the middle two that should give anyone pause

• The Comcast-NBC behemoth would control several distribution platforms — a major television network, the largest cable company and the largest Internet service provider. The merged company will have strong incentives and the market power to discriminate in granting access to its wealth of programming. It will have the incentive and market power to enforce anticompetitive “bundling” and price-gouge other cable companies, especially smaller cable companies.
• As the largest cable company and Internet service provider, Comcast will have the motive to move NBC’s video content behind a pay wall that will mean higher costs for consumers, and it would stunt the growth of the Internet as an alternative medium for video service. Placing video content behind a pay wall that is only available to Comcast cable customers is a classic example of “anticompetitive bundling.” That is, consumers who want Internet access to NBC programming will be forced to buy the bundle of cable and Internet.

The idea that one company would have that much control over the complete chain of entertainment – from creation to distribution to access is worrisome in my opinion.

There are those that will argue though that old media companies like NBC are a dying breed and that by Comcast buying them all that is happening is the extending of the inevitable in which case Comcast would come to regret the move. One good friend suggests that the change that is coming to the whole entertainment business within the next five to ten years will basically nullify any dangers that this kind of deal might bring to the consumer.

My point and I still think this is that regardless of whether the media industry changes radically in that time frame it doesn’t change the fact that there is a period of time where a company with the kind of control that Comcast will have could have an extremely negative impact on the consumer and possibly technology.

However there is always the chance of an upside to this as my friend Mark ‘Rizzn’ Hopkins pointed out to me when we chatted about this

Actually, it could be a good thing.

I’d hafta look at all the P&L sheets, but if NBC really tanks big time soon, and Comcast is highly vested in it, it could lead the the death of the company.

or a severe devaluation similar to the AOL Time Warner thing.

Gotta love the optimist I suppose but I am still left with a really bad feeling that nothing good is going to come out of this deal.

What do you think? Does this deal seem like an exceedingly bad idea to you and why aren’t more people talking about it and the potential fallout from it?

2010 could be the biggest disaster in the making for consumers and media is a post from: The Inquisitr