Comcast this morning announced that the company will be significantly expanding their free (for Comcast customers, anyway) Wi-Fi initiative, noting that alongside other cable partners they not provide more than 150,000 hotspots in major cities across the nation. More interestingly, Comcast says that the company is also launching an initiative that allows users to share their home bandwidth with other Comcast customers as part of a new project that mirrors similar efforts by companies like Fon.

According to the cable giant, their new wireless gateway broadcasts two Wi-Fi signals, one of which is secured for only private home use, with the other one one sharable under the "xfinitywifi" SSID. Through this second access route other Comcast customers will be able to enter their credentials and get Wi-Fi -- provided that the gateway's owner has allowed it.

Fortunately users can disable this functionality if they don't want to share their bandwidth with strangers, but Comcast says this functionality is enabled by default. Turning everyone's connections into new access routes for other Comcast customers seems to run contrary to a company that has traditionally wanted to manage "excessive" consumption through usage caps. Comcast discontinued usage caps last year saying they'd be trialing new models, but has yet to return to the idea.

While there's no community rewards or access time sharing options like the type we've seen with other Fon-esque programs of this type, it should offer Comcast users yet another Wi-Fi options if existing connectivity options are limited.

Microsoft has released more details on the DRM embedded in the Xbox One to stop piracy, and the reality is almost-but-not-quite as bad as most of the worrisome leaks predicted. According to Microsoft, the new Xbox One is a revolution in cloud computing, TV watching and gaming, but the changes will all come at a very steep price tag for consumers (in more than just the literal sense).

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt simply can't give up his dream of socking his broadband users with usage charges and even-higher fees, despite the immense and unprecedented public backlash to the idea just a few years back. Speaking at the Bank of America/Merrill Lynch Global Telecom and Media Conference in London, Britt stated that he sees some room to raise the company's recently imposed $4 modem rental fee.

Washington Post owned Cable One has traditionally been one of the most aggressive ISPs when it came to usage caps, but today announced that they're backing off the practice. CableOne has a rather long history of tinkering with low caps and often confusing pricing plans, including imposing different usage restrictions at different times of the day.

Last summer, cable operator Suddenlink decided to impose caps and charge their users overages -- before bothering to ensure that their usage meters worked. The result was a large number of complaints from users about meters that weren't reliable, and even tracked phantom subscriber usage when the power went out or modems were off.

• No national fiber broadband network for U.S. [lightwaveonline.com]
• FCC's Rosenworcel Sees Clear Path to Delivering High-Speed Internet Services to U.S. Consumers [huffingtonpost.com]
• Clearwire Postpones Sprint Vote, Could Force SoftBank’s Hand [wirelessweek.com]
• Suspension lifted 'political firestorm', Colorado's Eagle-Net Alliance is ready to build broadband network [bizjournals.com]
• Can Canada’s Failed Wireless Policy Be Saved [thestar.com]
• Judge orders Google to comply with FBI's secret NSL demands [cnet.com]
• U.S. Cellular gets into the 'Home Phone' biz for $20 a month [cnet.com]
• Acer is about to announce a PC that runs Android, showing that Windows and PC will not necessarily be synonymous in the near future [cnet.com]
• Megaupload founder wins access to evidence seized in raid [reuters.com]
• DirecTV, 2 Other Hulu Bidders Now at $1 Billion or More [bloomberg.com]
• Australia’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies seeking legal power to break into Tor, after admitting data retention will be “trivially easy” to defeat [crikey.com.au]
• Why Amazon is spending million$ to become a TV network: To get you to buy more k-cups, of course [huffingtonpost.com]
• For New FCC Chair, Getting Spectrum Auction Rules Right Is Critical Early Test [huffingtonpost.com]

Early last year we noted that AT&T, the company that really started the network neutrality debate to begin with, had come up with yet another awful new idea: charging app makers a fee if they wanted to send data to consumers without impacting their usage caps. While AT&T presented the idea as akin to a 1-800 number for data or "free shipping," what it actually is a troll toll imposed by AT&T allowing them to rake in new cash -- and impose their power on a content ecosystem and app marketplace that operates better with companies like AT&T out of the way.

The latest report (pdf) from the American Consumer Satisfaction Index highlights that consumer satisfaction with cable TV services remains among the worst in any industry -- and broadband ISP service satisfaction is even worse. While some companies made small strides, they haven't been enough.

As I've been discussing a lot lately (because it's the most important issue facing the broadband sector right now), both AT&T and Verizon are in the process of gutting regulations that require they continue offering copper landlines -- and by proxy DSL -- to tens of millions of Americans. Both companies insist that they're simply interested in "modernizing regulations" and ushering us into an "all IP age." In reality, both companies simply want to exit the fixed-line market in areas they're unwilling to upgrade.

Washington Post owned cable operator CableONE is promising a new round of $60 million in network upgrades to shore up some of the company's network shortcomings. According to CableONE, the investment will "provide Cable ONE customers with enhanced speed, reliability, and quality in their internet, cable, and phone service." "We’re committed to delivering the best possible experience to our customers," said Cable ONE President and Chief Executive Officer, Tom Might. That commitment includes some of the most aggressive usage caps in this industry, like a 3 GB daily throttle cap on their base 5 Mbps tier, or a 50 Mbps tier with caps as low as 50 GB. The company also is the only carrier we know of that applies punitive lower usage caps for users who refuse to bundle additional services.

Last summer, cable operator Suddenlink decided to impose caps and charge their users overages -- before bothering to ensure that their usage meters worked. The result was a large number of complaints from users about meters that weren't reliable, and even tracked phantom subscriber usage when the power went out or modems were off. Suddenlink then suspended the usage meter and overage plans, first insisting their meters were accurate -- then acknowledging they did find problems. Some seven months later and users in our forums point out that the meters have returned, though Suddenlink hasn't returned to its plan to charge overages -- yet.

One of several things ignored by outgoing FCC boss Julius Genachowski (aside from high prices, predatory below-the-line fees, and a lack of competition) was the anti-competitive use of usage caps and unreliable meters. Genachowski had a knack for telling a particular audience what they wanted to hear about the issue, before contradicting himself a week later.

AT&T's video streaming services have been decidedly "me too" affairs, ranging from a video portal that was effectively a Hulu clone to the U-Verse Screen Pack, which was touted as a "Netflix killer" but suffers from a limited catalog and is only available to U-Verse users for an additional $5 a month. However, a new survey being sent to U-Verse customers indicates AT&T is pondering expanding these options. Variety notes that the survey hints that the service might not be directly run by AT&T:As we noted recently, U-Verse users currently aren't being charged for overages but AT&T DSL users are. AT&T's curiosity in such a project comes after Verizon recently launched a streaming video service in conjunction with RedBox.

AT&T appears poised to begin offering new U-Verse speed tiers that should offer a belated speed increase for bandwidth-hungry users. Earlier this year AT&T promised users they'd eventually see 75-100 Mbps using line bonding, though the company was somewhat murky on deployment time -- or upstream speeds.

CenturyLink has confirmed with Broadband Reports that there are usage caps in place for residential users. A thread in our forums contained more than a few users who were confused about the caps; some users saying they'd been warned and even disconnected -- while other heavy users had never been warned.

AT&T has started using push polls and astroturf to convince Kentucky residents losing their DSL lines, paying higher prices, and losing all state consumer protections is going to work out really well for them. AT&T is of course going state to state insisting their telecom regulations need "modernizing" for an all IP age.

Fear that Canadian regulators were going to do their job has resulted in a welcome -- though likely brief -- return to unlimited broadband in Canada. Our friends to the north are well-known for some of the most predatory and punitive broadband caps and overages anywhere, courtesy of uncompetitive broadband markets and regulatory capture.

A few years ago Cox Communications clarified that the company imposes what they call "soft" usage caps, which may or may not be enforced depending on the market. Each market is broken down here, with the caps varying depending on where you live and what the local network can handle.

For years the cable industry insisted that they imposed usage caps because network congestion made them necessary. You'll recall that Time Warner Cable insisted that if they weren't allowed to impose caps and overages the Internet would face "brown outs." Cable operators also paid countless think tanks, consultants and fauxcademics to spin scary yarns about a looming network congestion "exaflood," only averted if cable operators were allowed to raise rates, impose caps, eliminate regulation or (insert pretty much anything here).

Last summer Time Warner Cable launched a new website named "Time Warner Cable Conversations," purportedly to engage in dialogue with consumers about cable TV prices and the company's efforts to slowly but surely impose usage-based pricing. The "conversation" began after Time Warner Cable's rather disastrous attempt to force caps and overages on subscribers, an effort since replaced with a voluntary cap tier that doesn't offer much value and as a result unsurprisingly hasn't seen much user adoption.