hulu

Describes motivation process for creativity with emphasis on intrinsic motivation by Corey K Katir

You’ve been warned. This truly is the worst Sarah Palin impersonation we’ve ever seen. Andy Samberg dressed as former Governor Palin and appeared on Saturday Night Live’s Weekend Update. The gag was that Tina Fey was supposed to do the bit, but she couldn’t make it so Samberg stepped in. Samberg keeps telling Seth Meyers that he’s “killing it.” So bad it’s good? No. Just no. Take a look:

Photo: Dana Edelson/NBC

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

In this Saturday Night Live skit from last night’s show, the Obama family has created a new sitcom which is modeled after The Cosby Show. Fred Armisen is President Obama as Bill Cosby/Cliff Huxtable and it works quite well, as does Michelle Obama (Maya Rudolph) as Clair Huxtable. Joe “Jamal” Biden (Jason Sudeikis) is their son Theo. The president spends most of his time trying to get out of eating the healthy rice cakes that his wife thinks are more appropriate than a hoagie. Take a look:

Photo: Dana Edelson/NBC

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

The Cold Open for Saturday Night Live was a skit in which Newt Gingrich (Bobby Moynihan) has left the Earth to become president of the Moon Colony. He is joined in space by his wife Callista (Kristen Wiig), Admiral Herman Cain (Kenan Thompson) and a surprise stowaway — Mitt Romney (Jason Sudeikis). It’s ridiculous, but it’s actually pretty funny. Kristen’s Callista is a scream. Take a look:

Photo: Dana Edelson/NBC

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Jon Stewart of The Daily Show lit into New Gingrich over allegations made by Gingrich’s second wife Marianne that he wanted to have an open marriage. Jon noted that Newt left his first wife when she got cancer, then left his second wife when she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. He said that Newt is like the dioxin of husbands — toxic. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have been piling on Mitt Romney for the past couple of weeks, relentlessly painting him as a ruthless corporate raider who is so wealthy he is out of touch with regular Americans. It’s gotten so bad that even Rush Limbaugh put the smackdown on Gingrich today, saying he’s just being petty and wants revenge for all those ads Romney ran against Gingrich in Iowa. Even Ron Paul stepped up and defended Romney’s comments about firing companies who don’t do well (which has been twisted into “I love to fire individual people and watch them suffer”).

Jon Stewart of The Daily Show points out the hypocrisy of the current crop of Republican candidates in going after Romney using the Democrats’ talking points. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Saturday Night Live brought back Darrell Hammond to skewer Donald Trump who is determined to moderate a GOP debate (even though he still may run for president). It ended up being a two man debate, after every other GOP candidate declined to attend. Greta Van Susteren (Kristen Wiig) held the tiny debate on her show. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum (Andy Samberg) attended, but neither got to say a word because narcissistic windbag Trump wouldn’t shut up.

Trump said he was qualified to host the debate because he’s worth $7 billion, his show The Apprentice has 5 billion viewers and his hot wife Melania is 38 years younger than he is.

He did talk foreign policy, saying “I’ll tell you what I would do Greta. I’d get the Iranians, the Chinese and the leaders of OPEC together in a room – not at the White House, but at my house in Florida, Mar-a-Lago. Again: 90,000 square feet. Greta, trust me. They would be so disoriented by its square-footage, they would be at a disadvantage. And then I would read them the riot act and tell them to cut out all this BS.” Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Stephen Colbert is furious that Donald Trump is getting to moderate a GOP debate. He says that he is much more qualified to host a debate (he’s joking, but he’s probably right). Colbert will host the debate in January on Animal Planet and is now waiting for the candidates to call him to accept (we hope he’s not holding his breath on that one). He says candidates will be required to eat a live bug before answering questions. After all, if you can’t eat a bug, how will you deal with China, because “that’s all they eat.” Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Fred Armisen did the cold open for Saturday Night Live last night. Playing President Obama, he gave a speech to the nation about the real power structure in the United States. He notes that he didn’t even make the top five most powerful people. Number one on the list is Congress, which has the power to do nothing at all including pass his jobs legislation: “Congress is like Hotel California. My legislation checks in but it can never leave.” Number 2 is Grover Norquist who got a number of congressmen to sign a no tax pledge, when the president could only get a maybe from Nancy Pelosi as to whether she’d buy some girl scout cookies from Malia. Number 3 is Oprah. Number 4 is the NFL. “If this address were interrupting a game, they wouldn’t even carry it.”

Number 5 is Mark Zuckerberg: “in 2008 I had to beg to get 69 million votes. Meanwhile 800 million of you have given this man photos of yourself drunk at an office Christmas party wearing a giant Cat in the Hat hat.” Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Mitt is tired of the spotlight being stolen from him by Herman Cain with his sex scandals and Rick Perry with his constant “whoops-a-daisys.” To spice up his image, we get to see “Mitt: Raw and Unleashed.” He removes his jacket (although he later put it back on, because it made him uncomfortable.” He then asked a female employee if he ever said anything inappropriate to her (“not really,” she replied.) He also reveals his vile temper, works on some endearing flubs and tries on a leather jacket to show his edginess (“this is really heavy.”) He also gets a letter written in lipstick from a women (his wife.) We just love Jason as Mitt. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Saturday Night Live took aim at Rick Perry’s latest debate gaffe, with a few pokes at Herman Cain’s sexual harassment scandals. Cain (Kenan Thompson) wanted to set the record straight about all those women coming forward alleging he groped or harassed him noting, “For every woman who has come forward there are two who have not.” Governor Perry (Bill Hader) tried to reveal the three government agencies he would cut. Unfortunately he couldn’t remember the last agency he would cut, saying: “Education, Commerce and ewwwwwwwwwww. If I heard it, I’d know it.”

Perry’s performance was so painful to watch the other candidates tried to divert attention to other topics. Mitt Romney (Jason Sudeikis) said, “Can we move on? I want to be president, but not like this.” Herman Cain looks shocked, while Michele Bachmann (Kristen Wiig) covers Newt Gingrich’s (Bobby Moynihan) eyes from the unfolding fiasco. Rick Santorum (Andy Samberg) finally bursts out “Make it stop. Somebody make it stop!” Finally, Herman Cain volunteers to share all the “vivid details” of his encouters with women over the years if the moderator will just move on. “And there are a lot!” he says.

Finally, Mitt comes over to console the Texas governor and “put him out to pasture.” And yes, that’s a gun in Romney’s hands. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Saturday Night Live took aim at Texas Governor Rick Perry last night. In the Weekend Update segment, Bill Hader played the governor who explained his animated speech in New Hampshire. Many people thought Perry was drunk or on meds during his speech, but he denied it. That didn’t stop Hader from really getting into the role, with a rambling explanation of how he’s just terrible with words. It also involved a hula doll. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Saturday Night Live took aim at the endless series of Republican presidential debates. The latest debate was held in a local Marriot Hotel and broadcast on the hotel’s channel. Herman Cain (Kenan Thompson), Mitt Romney (Jason Sudeikis), Rick Perrry (Bill Hader), Michele Bachmann (Kristen Wiig) and Newt Gingrich (Bobby Moynihan), Ron Paul and Rick Santorum (Andy Samberg) all participated. The seating was determined by popularity — that left an unhappy Santorum in a gay bar in the Castro, and Michele and Newt in the janitor’s closet, while Herman Cain sat at the center of the table. Herman said he never thought he would be taken seriously with his 9-9-9 plan. But, since it worked, he introduced his 3-3-3 plan for healthcare: if you get sick you get three pills, three days off and three chicken noodle soups. Meanwhile Ron Paul — who was banished to the basement garage — manages to outwit and dispatch armed kidnappers with no problem at all. Take a look:

Photo: Dana Edelson/NBC

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

In the Saturday Night Live Cold Open from last night, Jason Sudeikis played Mitt Romney addressing top Republican donors. The donors really want plain spoken New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to run and are desperate to find a way to make it happen. Finally, Mitt warns donors he’s about to get mad saying, “I’m about to get angry. I’m not talking Regular Angry. I’m talking Mormon Angry. You’re going to hear words like shucks, fudge and the biggie — cheese and crackers.”

Finally, Governor Christie (Bobby Moynihan) has to scold them for being mean to Romney. He also explains why he can’t run — he points to his waistline and says “This can’t go national.” But after telling Romney to cover his ears, he explains his secret plan to run in 2016. It’s very funny. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

The Cold Open for Saturday Night Live last night was the latest Republican debate. Mitt Romney (Jason Sudeikis) thanked Rick Perry (Alec Baldwin) for “not playing the Mormon card.” Rick Perry proceeded to alienate every group of voters by flip flopping on every issue and confusing everyone (he gets advice only from Jesus Christ and Rachel Maddow). John Huntsman (Taran Killam), the former Ambassador to China, talked in an offensive fake Chinese accent. Newt Gingrich (Bobby Moynahan) admits he doesn’t really want to be president and promptly left the debate.

Andy Samberg did a hilarious impersonation of the nervous Rick Santorum, who admitted he is “confused and flabbergasted” by modern life. He shared that he worried that “half of all marriages end in sweatpants.” Michele Bachmann (Kristen Wiig) said she believed paying no taxes will return this country will return to things the way they were thousands of years ago. Herman Cain (Kenan Thompson) explained that the pizza parlor is the best model for the U.S. government (he is the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza). The debate ends with Rick Perry passing out on his podium. Take a look:

Permalink | Facebook | Twitter | Recent Headlines | News Feeds

Blockbuster (BBI) is on its last legs. After moving billions upon billions of dollars through its registers, shepherding the transition from VHS to DVD and DVD to Blu-Ray and watching Netflix (NFLX) and Redbox invent new ways to rent movies, it stands on the brink. Last month, it warned the SEC that it could declare bankruptcy anytime (a threat that has since ebbed slightly), it plans to close more than 500 stores this year, and itas in danger of getting delisted from the New York Stock Exchange. After 25 years, it appears people just donat want to go see a Blockbuster anymore.

But when I told Kevin Lewis that I was worried about whether Blockbuster could survive, his face contorted. Lewis is Blockbusteras senior vice-president of digital entertainment, and he is a man who believes in his employer. A few weeks ago, I met with him and two other guys in charge of Blockbusteras digital strategy at the companyas loft office space in downtown Manhattan. Itas meant to be the headquarters for the digital teamathe group of staffers who carry the weight of Blockbusteras future. On the day I visited, none of the staffers were in the office. I suppressed the urge to see a metaphor where there wasnat one. (They were all traveling.)

Blockbuster, I was told over and over again, is poised for a comeback. Its brand is more established than any other. Itas the only company that can offer movies in stores, in kiosks, online, and by mail. Most importantly, just because more and more Americans watch movies onlineawhether it be through Web-connected computers, Blu-Ray players, or DVRsadoesnat mean they want to stop watching the newest movies. Netflix and Redbox canat provide those when they first come out. Blockbuster is proud that it canaso proud that this is the first thing you see on its homepage:

The companyas final, last-gasp strategy to regain its swagger and prepare for the future is to harp on this fact over and over again. Lewis would not stop mentioning the amultichannel consumeraathe ideal people who aare in stores, they’re renting digitally, they’re going to kiosks, they’re buying VOD, they’re going to theaters. Theyare entertainment omnivoresa|Weare the only company that spans alla|of those (channels).a And these omnivores want their movies as soon as they can. According to Lewis, 70 percent of new rentals happen in their first 30 days of release.

When you combine all this, the motto is essentially that Blockbuster is the only place that can get you what you want, when you want it, how you want it. Taken as a whole, thatas true. But when you break down the motto to its three partsawhat you want, when you want, how you wantathings get far more muddled, and for Blockbuster, far more dire.

In Blockbusteras view, it can survive because of the chart below. It shows last yearas top-10 grossing movies that are available digitally. Lewis bragged that all of them are on Blockbuster; none are on Netflix. Itas an especially important detail, as more than half of Netflix subscribers are now streaming movies. At my request, Blockbusteras PR rep sent the chart over:

Netflix canat stream those movies online because the studios wonat let them. Compared with Blockbusteras well-stocked shelves, Netflixas digital library is like a food pantry that contains only peanut butter and jelly. Netflix has made deals with several studios that give them a larger digital catalog, but it also forces them to wait 28 days to start sending them to customers the old-fashioned way: on disc. Similarly, Redbox, the king of kiosks, is being forced to delay the release of movies as a peace offering to the studios.

On this issue, Blockbuster is right; itas far better digitally than Netflix. Blockbuster can offer digital downloads because it asks customers to pay for digital movies the same way they rent DVDsaa la carte. (The studios prefer this to Netflixas come-one, come-all digital strategy.) Renting a movie on Blockbuster runs $4.

Of course, theyare not the only company that can do that. Steve Jobs long ago realized Blockbuster was on the ropes and decided to provide an alternative. So letas amend that chart.

Nearly all are on iTunes. But thatas not the whole picture, either. If digital downloads are to be a success, theyare going to be watched on an actual TV, not on the computer screen. Netflix knows this, which is why itas putting its Watch Instantly service on every Blu-Ray, TiVo, and game console known to man. Blockbuster is trying to do the same. By the end of the year it claims itall be on nearly every brand of Web-enabled TV and Blu-Ray device sold. Of course, once these services migrate off the computer and on to the TV, theyare contending with a new force: on-demand. Cable providers have steadily added to their pay-per-view offerings. Iam trotting the chart back out, this time with a new Comcast On-Demand column added.

So Blockbuster and Comcast On-Demand are identical for at least in this small sample. Blockbusteras strategy is to double-down on these new releases because Netflix and RedBox donat have them. But if cable providers do, that invalidates Blockbusteras claim on the space. Itas correct that Netflix and Redbox have been Blockbusteras greatest enemies over the last few years. But moving forward, itas a different kind of netbox that will eventually beat Blockbusteras: the cable box.

The last piece of Blockbusteras motto left standing is its assertion that itas the premiere place you can get these films when you want them. On-Demand will soon make that moot, as well. The film industry has finally wised up and realized it doesnat need middlemen like Blockbuster anymore. It can use the cable operators instead. Last month, the New York Times reported that studios were collectively marketing on-demand cable as the best way to get their content. Theyare tossing $30 million at it, mainly because they get 65 cents from every dollar spent on on-demand, compared with roughly 25 cents at Blockbuster. As of now, not all movies get released via on-demand at the same time theyare released on Blockbuster. But Comcast told me it has more movies on-demand this year than ever before, and itas getting them sooner than it had in the past. Several of the on-demand movies from the previous chart were on-demand the same day they were available for rental at Blockbuster. Given the 65-cents versus 25-cents economics, one would figure that trend will only hold.

To be fair, Blockbusteras big strategy isnat just that it offers the movies you want, where you want them, when you want them. Itas that theyare the only place that can deliver all three at the same time. True enough. Blockbuster is readying a massive database of where all of its movies are available. This way if you want to rent, say, GoodFellas, and itas not available online, the database will tell you itas down the street at a retail location or available through Blockbusteras Netflix-like DVD-by-mail service. Itas the integrated service for the Blockbuster diehard.

But in an age of iPads, Boxees, and Netflixes, how many Blockbuster diehards can there be? This is the age of gadget diversity. We donat need or want one megalith to handle all our video needs. (Only Apple [AAPL] has managed to create the kind of cultish walled-garden that Blockbuster daydreams about.) And even for the less tech-inclinedaif a video is available on their cable box, why go outside and get it from a retail store? Or even from the Blu-Ray player that has Blockbuster DVDs. When I was at Blockbusteras digital office, their crew told me how pleased they were to be the first thing people see when they boot up a Samsung Blu-Ray player. But compared with cable on-demand, that Blu-Ray player is still a secondary option. That means Blockbuster is, too.

That leaves Blockbusteras brick-and-mortar retail business as its one unique characteristic. Of course, brick-and-mortar is what got Blockbuster into this mess in the first place. The same social trends that forced Blockbuster to shutter those stores donat look like theyare ebbing any time soon. Back-catalog movies are still available through RedBox and Netflix for far less than Blockbuster sells them for in stores. Broadband is becoming more and more prevalent in the country every day, allowing more people to download videos and skip the drive to the strip mall. Blockbuster isnat just running out of time and money. Itas running out of customers. Unfortunately, those arenat available on demand.

At this rate, whenever Hulu does announce a subscription plan, itas going to be anticlimactic. Huluas CEO, Jason Kilar, has been dropping hints about it for months, and now we have even more detail about what itas probably going to look like.

The Los Angeles Times is reporting that by late May Hulu is going to charge $10 bucks a month for the privilege of watching old videos. If you donat pay the $10, youall still be able to watch the last five episodes of current shows, but nothing beyond that. No word on whether subscribers will still see ads.

For Hulu, this is a gateway business model. The plan isnat robust enough to fund Huluas future on its own. But it does begin to acclimate Huluas users to paying for an archive of content. What falls into that archive is up to Hulu, and thereas nothing that prevents it from moving more and more shows behind the subscription wall as time goes by. The Times reports that Hulu will continue to stream the last five episodes of a show for free. But what if that quickly becomes only the last three episodes? Or only the last one? Then the subscription plan becomes a must for people. Hulu would incentivize signing up by offering more for the subscriptionaand offering less to those without one.

We know that Hulu has disrupted the way we watch TV. But itas done far less to change the way we watch movies. Thatas because right now the movies on Hulu are incredibly obscure. But that doesnat mean they have to be. Every week Hulucination will keep track of how many movies are on Hulu and how many reviews they have on Netflix (NFLX). Weall chart the results as time goes by to tell you whether Hulu is getting closer to Transformers and farther from Thunderbolt and Lightfoot.

Hulu Theater is growing tired of Huluas cinematic inertia. Yet again this week, Huluas movies are just as obscure as they have been every other week. 62.6 percent of the movies are also in Netflixas database. Theyare reviewed relatively well, with an average of three out of five stars in both median and mean. The median number of rankings is slightly higher, though. Theyave got an average of 10,254 rankings instead of 10,083.

Six years ago, Redboxes were meant to sell Goobers, not Goonies. The DVD-rental kiosks that are now in Wal-Marts (WMT), grocery stores, and McDonaldas joints across the country were meant to be automated 7-Elevens, not robotic Blockbusters. McDonaldas (MCD)awhich owned Redbox at the timeafigured convenience stores were convenient enough without somebody behind the counter. So why pay an employee when a machine could do all the work? Nothing in convenience stores is that fresh anyway, so customers wouldnat care if the personal touch was removed from the transaction.

They were wrong. Something about buying a gallon of milk without someone actually selling it was too sterile, too cold. (Or maybe the fear was that it wasnat cold enough.)

But all was not lost. At the same time McDonaldas released the convenience-store units, it also put 12 DVD kiosks into the field. People werenat as untrusting toward an automated purchase of something they didnat have to eat. They were still consuming; they just werenat ingesting.

Since then, Redbox has seemingly added an automated kiosk for every closing of a manned video-rental shop. In six and a half years, it has gone from those 12 trial units to 22,400. Thanks to Redbox, Netflix (NFLX), and the rise of On Demand (both through cable and the Internet), the process of renting a movie has been completely disrupted. Blockbuster is either teetering on the edge of bankruptcy or pretending itas not already there, and mom-and-pop rental stores have all but disappeared from small towns. Redbox is as responsible for the destruction as the rest of the hydra.

But at some point this new monster is going to run out of things to destroy. And when it does, itas going to have to start turning on itself. Last week, word got out that Redbox was thinking about streaming movies over the Internet, just like all of its other competitors. If it happened, it would be a meaningful expansion to Redboxas business model, and one that puts it in even fiercer competition with its crimson colleague, Netflix.

The reason itas looking online is because it has been so successful offline. It did that by being comfortably innovative, offering something new without ripping the rug out from under the way consumers already rented DVDs. There were four elements to the old way of doing things: 1) Renting a movie was an impulse decision, 2) a real person checked you out, 3) you got to take a real disc (or tape) home, and 4) you had to remember to bring the disc back by a certain time. The On Demand services have retained only the first step. Netflix has held on to the third. Redbox, meanwhile, has held on to three. All but the real, live person have been retained. And on top of that, Redbox threw in budget prices. Renting a DVD usually costs $1 a day.

This gradualism has paid off handsomely. In 2005, supermarket-kiosk magnate Coinstar (CSTR) bought part of the company for $20 million. Four years later, it bought the rest for $176 million. It was worth the money. Redbox is growing faster than Robin Williams in Jack. In 2009, 8,700 new kiosks were spread out across the country. Pre-existing kiosks rented $105 million more in DVDs in 2009 than they did in 2008. Coinstar took in $385 million more from DVD rentals in 2009 than in 2008 (aided, no doubt, by its full purchase of Redbox). And that extra revenue brought in more profit, too: $56 million more from DVD operations. Redbox has become by far Coinstaras biggest business. The companyas namesakeathose machines you dump your coin jars into at the supermaketanow pales in comparison, bringing in one-third of the revenue that Redbox does.

So, if things are going so well, why would Redbox turn its attention online? If it does begin to stream movies, it is going to be entering a marketplace brimming with retailers new and old. Amazon (AMZN), Apple (AAPL), and smaller upstarts allow users to rent movies a la carte. Netflix already has a streaming service on nearly every Internet-enabled device known to man. Hulu lets you watch (an obscure selection of) movies online, for free, with some ad interruptions. For these guysaNetflix includedathe online plans have to work or else theyare screwed.

But Redbox isnat nearly as desperate. It already knows it can survive as the country moves more toward online video. Otherwise its kiosk business wouldnat be thriving. But for-profit companies like to sniff for more profit. Thus it has to at least explore the online option; not doing so would be irresponsible. There is money to be made online, especially when video is paid for by the customer, not advertising. Also, getting into video streaming is a nice hedge in case online video becomes wildly more popular than it is now.

But that doesnat mean itas the right move for Redbox. At first glance, a streaming Redbox would be more in competition with Amazon and iTunes than with Netflix. But Redbox would likely be forced/able to undercut their prices because of its existing business model. Itas hard to ask customers to spend more money for something online than they would at the store down the street. The same logic applies to the local kiosk. But Redbox may not be able to afford to do that. To make online streaming happen, Redbox would likely have to renegotiate its contracts with the studios to include streaming rights. (I asked a Redbox spokesman whether this is true, but he declined to comment.) And acquiring those rights is expensive; on new releases, the number is likely more than the $1 Redbox charges at its kiosks. At first, it may have to run the online business at a loss to get the momentum going and hope that acquisition prices go down so it doesnat have to increase rental prices.

The low prices Redbox will likely charge mean itas really competing with Netflix, not Amazon, Apple, et al. But Netflixas subscription model is much pricier than Redboxas $1 a la carte strategy. (Assuming Netflix users donat stream eight movies a month.) Online, Netflix is better situated to reap profit, especially as customers ask it to stream more movies and send fewer DVDs.

Thus far, both Redbox and Netflix have been able to exist in the world of actual discs. (Netflixas own revenue has steadily risen every year for the last five.) And similar to their offline offerings, both companies would provide different services online. Redbox would go after the impulse buyer who favors more big-budget fare. Netflix would cater to the person who wants a deep library of meaningful, arty classics. Itas essentially Avatar vs. The Hurt Locker all over again. But like Avatar, Redboxas magic may not be as impressive online.

Because Congress doesnat have enough to do, itas time to add net neutrality to the legislative agenda. An appeals court has decided that the FCC, as currently comprised, doesnat have the authority to enforce net neutrality on its own. Up until now the FCC has been regulating Internet companies under a questionable reading of the law. Like a cocky hall monitor, the FCC figured since it had control over some elements of the media spectrum it could pretend to have a say on the Internet side, as well. It was wrong.

Net neutralityafor those not masochistic enough to be acquaintedais the general principle that access to the Internet should remain equal for all people, no matter what company they use to get on the Internet. There is some (justified) concern that companies that provide Internet access (Comcast [CMCSA], Verizon [VZ], AT&T [ATT], etc.) would charge extra for speedy access to certain sites. Having full and quick access to Google (GOOG), for example, could run you an extra dollar per month. This kind of system is reminiscent of what the networks and cable companies have done with all those cable channels you love to watch. You want ESPN? Be prepared to pay an extra $6 a month on your cable bill. You want ESPN.com? Be prepared to pay an extra 60 cents a month on your Internet bill.

Now that the court has said net neutrality isnat part of the FCCas job description, three things can happen.

1) The FCC can go to a higher court to try to convince those judges that this appeals court was wrong. (For what its worth, the appeals court unanimously ruled against the FCC, 3-0.)

2) The FCC can give up and do nothing, leaving the Internet open to the very Net Neutrality abuses it is so committed to stopping.

3) The FCC and the Obama administration can harangue Congress into passing a law that says FCC does have the authority the court says it doesnat.

Because of this third option, there is no need to pop an Alka -eltzer and start frothing from the mouth. The court ruled against the FCCas authority as currently comprised. It said nothing about the constitutionality of an agency like the FCC regulating net neutrality. (That, surely, will be the subject of another lawsuit if a bill passes Congress.) A bill that would give the FCC that power has been introduced in the House, but there hasnat been much action on it. Todayas court decision lends an urgency to that bill that had been missing. The Obama administration is a supporter of network neutrality, and could possibly lean on Congress to pass some version of the proposed bill. The usual telecom lobby would surely call in favors to oppose.

Online video sites have as much at stake as any other Web properties. Online video costs more to host, costs more to transfer, but doesnat cost more to receive than the rest of the Internet. That is an imbalance that an unregulated market wonat allow to persist. Those afraid of a world without net neutrality fear that online video would be the first thing to be priced differently based on who provides your Internet service. Comcast, for example, could slow down the streaming on ABC.com video because it wants to incentivize customers to watch Comcast programming online. It would charge an extra fee to get full-speed access to the throttled content. The same paradigm applies to Hulu, with the extra complication that Comcast may be taking over NBCas share if the Comcast-NBC merger gets approved.

Todayas court decision doesnat change the stakes of this battle. Nor does it change the historical outcome. Itas just something that defers the dream. My guess is Langston Hughesa. The dream wonat dry up, fester, or crust over. Itas going to explode.

Personal Injury Lawyer Los Angeles – FREE CONSULTATION by Personal Injury Attorney Los Angeles – Legal Defenders, Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyers – Law Offices of Burg and Brock, who have won over $100 million in verdicts and settlements for clients

Page took 3 seconds to load.