This feels like a big step in the wrong direction but here's the problem...If content providers can't limit the consumption of their content (at all), they esse

This feels like a big step in the wrong direction but here's the problem...If content providers can't limit the consumption of their content (at all), they essentially become "public good" providers. Their work is non-excludable (anyone can access it) and non-rivalrous (my consumption doesn't affect your consumption). There are plenty of solutions* and limiting streaming via an internet provider may actually be the right one. Big (expensive) streaming content like the Olympics is paid for in the same way we pay for TV channels. Which is good, if the alternative is that content not being provided at all. Unfortunately, this is ultimately in everyone's worst interest because Comcast can (and will) force Netflix/Hulu/NBC/ABC/CBS/YouTube/Vimeo/ComedyCentral/etc to pay to be "carried" on their network. And they won't have a lot of leverage. We need pay for high-quality content. It's just a matter of how. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good#Possible_solutions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good#Possible_solutions