The "Net Neutrality" debate is confusing, and I'm not the only one who thinks so. Andy Kessler from The Weekly Standard calls the issue "bizarre" and "hard to understand" and opines: "both sides are off their rocker." He argues that the answer is not regulation. The telcos and cable companies, he says, are loathe to upgrade their networks -- it's expensive, and, why would they without the government stepping in? They want neutrality regulations to be quelled because "without the ability to extract money from the webbies for the use of their not-so-fast Alexander Graham Bell-era wires (forget that you and I already overpay for this), AT&T or Verizon might not have any business model going forward."

Kessler's "modest proposal" is creative and a little diabolical (ergo: I love it). "Maybe the incumbent network providers--the Verizons, Comcasts, AT&Ts--can be made to compete; threatening to seize their stagnating networks via eminent domain is just one creative idea to get them to do this. A truly competitive, non-neutral network could work, but only if we know its real economic value. If telcos or cable charge too much, someone should be in a position to steal the customer. Maybe then we'd see useful services and a better Internet. Sounds like capitalism."

What does the blogerati think about the idea of seizing broadband in the name of eminent domain?

According to the HRRC, a new lawsuit brought by the recording industry's bulldog, the RIAA, is treating law-abiding consumers as "pirates" and violating the implied promise that they would not go after consumers who rip their own recordings for personal use. At the heart of the lawsuit is a new device released by XM Satellite Radio, the Inno, which allows consumers to record the programming broadcast over its network.

The RIAA seeks $150,000 in damages for every song copied by consumers onto the Inno. The suit is roundly being attacked as a desperate and evil move by an industry association that has already placed itself on everyone's most-hated list. The most succinct analysis, though, comes from Mike at Techdirt: "this is about the recording industry looking to squeeze more money out of a dying business model rather than recognizing these new services help make the recording industry's product much more valuable."

Either way, this could be very critical for XMSR (and similar products that Sirius might have in development) if it's taken at all seriously by the courts. The stock is down $0.12 in intraday trading, which saw the stock dip to its 52-week low, to $16.50, after a relatively huge drop yesterday.

Time Warner moved almost not at all today, down only six cents on below-average volume of about 21 million shares. And at $17.34, the stock is smack dab in the middle of the company's very tiny 52-week range (low: $16.10, high: $19.00).

Everyone seems to be in a holding pattern awaiting the earnings release later this week. But that doesn't mean no one cares! Someone always cares about Time Warner. Today, it's the family-friendly lobby, who is up in arms over the new family-friendly packages cable companies, like Time Warner and Comcast are offering - and not marketing enough. They'd rather see a la carte options so each family can decide what, indeed, it deems to be friendly.

As Carlo at Techdirt points out, "Cable companies aren't completely stupid -- if offering a la carte, or spending more to market family tiers would pay off, they'd jump on it." Everyone who's been through a microeconomics course at a good business school has done the problem set where we learn that bundling cable channels maximizes revenue! And what do shareholders want more than maximized revenue? Certainly not cable companies parenting our kids (and choosing, for instance, whether our kids should watch Fox News, or Animal Planet, or neither of the above). Commenters at Techdirt riff on cable monopolies, extortion, and bad parenting but I think none of this matters: shareholders don't give a darn whether or not Time Warner markets family-friendly cable bundles. As long as that revenue stays maximized.