In this week's podcast, we talk Net Neutrality, the various troubles of Comcast, PK's Creator's Freedom Project, and interview Jane Litte about her project lostbooksales.com that tracks lost ebook sales due to restrictive licensing or incompatibility.

You can download the audio directly by clicking here (MP3) or stream it using the player below:

Want to subscribe to our podcast? Click here for the MP3 feed and here for the mixed audio/video feed.

The National Broadband Plan is a chance for the FCC to articulate a vision for improving the deployment and adoption of broadband in the United States. In two sets of comments filed this week with the FCC, we highlight recommendations that would encourage new entry into broadband markets, and encourage the FCC to put its treatment of broadband on a firmer legal ground. Additionally, along with many other public interest groups, we're a signatory to this statement encouraging the FCC to adopt a bold, yet pragmatic policy for promoting broadband.

These issues are complex--it's hard to reduce broadband policy to a couple of key phrases. In general, the market structure for broadband services has been shaped by decades of conflicted public policy. We believe that this structure should be moved in a direction that promotes the entry of new broadband competitors. This post will summarize some key points from our separate filings.

Public Knowledge has long argued that the market for "video devices"--things like set-top boxes and DVRs that you attach to your cable or satellite provider's network--is not as competitive as it should be. In fact, it's not as competitive as the law requires: back in the 1990s, Congress directed the FCC to adopt regulations promoting common standards of interoperability to make the market for these video devices as competitive as the market for other high-tech equipment. As a result of this lack of competition, consumers end up paying high prices for limited devices.

There are many reasons for this lack of competition.

Earlier today, the New York Times' Bits Blog reported that starting next month, New York-based cable provider Cablevision will offer 101Mbps (downstream) service to the 5 million people in its service area at a cost of $99.99 per month. While $100 per month for Internet service is not quite what most of us would consider a deal, Cablevision's latest service offering--which will be the fastest Internet service available to consumers in the United States--looks a lot more affordable when juxtaposed with comparable services. Both Verizon and Comcast currently charge $140/month for 50Mbps downstream service (Verizon charges less in a few highly competitive markets), which means that with Cablevision, you're getting more than double the downstream bandwidth for around 70% of the price. Sure, a cost to speed ratio of $0.99 per megabit might not seem like a great value when compared to speeds and prices overseas but for the U.S., Cablevision's announcement represents a big step forward for the affordability of high-speed broadband. How can Cablevision afford to offer such fast service at such a relatively low price?