Why should the ISP's have to provide actual bandwidth for the money they are getting? This means that you will still pay outrageous fees for internet connection and are restricted to several MB's per month. This looks like a win/win for the corporations. What's not for the ISP's to love in this plan?

Its just a back door way of getting past Internet Privacy.

Once its done, it can be used for other purposes as the precident is set.

about my previous comment: where did my newlines go? it's all a barely readable mess now :((

to riaa: Liar Liar pants on fire

RIAA Caught Lying About Stopping Lawsuits
http://techdirt.com/articles/20081221/1519113180.shtml

RIAA claim not to have filed new cases "for months" is false
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_archive.html#1104859189661357526

If the Riaa is successful in it's 3 strike approach it will only lead the masses to create a much more advanced file sharing system than Bittorrent.

And it will be a cold day in hell before they crack ISP's. they will stick to their "We're only providing an internet connection stance" and without Subpoenas for people's data they will clam up tighter than a snare drum.

I see this announcement as admitting they lost now that the precedent has been set in court that they cannot sue people for bittorrnt. It's game over for RIAA.

Remember the only people they have actually sued and won were people using Kazaa/Limewire type FS networks.