I know that on one hand, I'm nitpicking. But on the other hand, it makes me queasy when some guy discusses the merits of IP-related policy without knowing the

I know that on one hand, I'm nitpicking. But on the other hand, it makes me queasy when some guy discusses the merits of IP-related policy without knowing the facts. How can he say that AT&T has lost its mind if he doesn't even realize that AT&T is probably after people that are torrenting movies and mp3s around the clock, not those swapping pictures of Britney? And if AT&T is talking to the MPAA and RIAA, part of the bargain will certainly be that AT&T gets to keep their legal immunities, even if it means that the lobbyists are going to have to change the law. In any case, the underground traffickers of celebrity photos are going to stay unaffected. There must be some subtly behind AT&T's contemplations. They may have decided that they are losing money on certain of their customers, and as a regulated monopoly that can't just raise prices, they may have to resort to legalities such as this in order to eliminate customers, which as an action they deem more efficient than laying down additional infrastructure.