Thursday article links

CNET and Broadband Reports have detailed the highly competitive environment between cable and telephone companies in video product (CNET) and broadband Internet (BBR). The good news for cable? This past quarter was the slowest ever for DSL connects and the BBR posits that when DOCSIS 3.0 is fully rolled out, cable will be even more competitive in the delivery of high-speed Internet.

Broadband war gets bloodier [CNET News]

DSL Takes A Beating [Broadband Reports]

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin sat down with New York Times reporters yesterday on the eve of an FCC vote on Comcast's network management techniques. Martin believes that the vote will signal a new era of openness on the Internet, but when asked whether AT&T's recent announcement that they will terminate subscribers on their wireless network for P2P usage would violate this openness, Martin declined to answer.

Toward the end of the article, Martin was quoted as saying, "Eventually people will not pay for cable and will watch YouTube instead." Later, a spokesman for Martin called the NYT to correct the quote from "will not pay" to "will pay less."

Broadband Politics covered Martin's interview as well as another editorial on net neutrality in the NYT yesterday.

Kevin Martin’s Open Network Manifesto [NYT Bits Blog]

Kevin Martin’s secret regulations [Broadband Politics]

Google is telling a Pennsylvania couple, whose house was photographed and posted on Google Street View, to chill out. The couple's house was photographed from a private driveway, and they sued Google for trespassing.

But in their response to the lawsuit, Google tells the couple that they live in the 21st century, where complete privacy no longer exists (largely thanks to Google).

Google Says Complete Privacy Does Not Exist [Slashdot]

And, Scrabulous is back on Facebook, but it looks different and has a different name - Wordscraper.

'Scrabulous' gets a nip-tuck, returns as 'Wordscraper' [CNET News]

Comments

[sineswiper]

Well, Google's argument was that you could view the house from a satellite image, so this illusion that an entire private residence could be completely enclosed in an invisible bubble is a faulty idea. The fact that the Google's camera car drove into their driveway was partly the owner's fault because there was no "Private Property" sign on a driveway that looks like a street.

Besides, Google took down the pictures to their house, as they do for any privacy request. The pictures they did have were just pictures of the house, so no harm no foul. I think the owners are just after money from Google's deep pockets.