Anymore, the ISPs and the entertainment industry are the same entities.

AT&T owns WarnerMedia, formerly Time Warner, which owns cable networks, movie & music studios. Most of the entertainment Americans consume are owned or produced by AT&T or a subsidiary.

Which is why the next multi-billion dollar company is a simple ISP, the one charging $$ for delivering IP packets. Unfortunately, it is not sexy enough for VCs to fund.

I doubt it. Google couldn't break into this market with all of their money, influence, and incentive. I see nothing to suggest any other company could.

Regulatory capture has turned the internet into a de facto monopoly. There won't be any new players because they can be sued or acquired long before they become a threat. Our only hope is for regulations that prevent ISPs and media companies from being under the same umbrella.

I don't know about most of the entertainment. Now that Disney owns Fox Studios they're the other major creator of film and music.

AT&T has ownership stakes an a lot of companies which end up working on projects with Fox, Sony, NBC, etc. They also co-own several distribution channels with said companies.

So they absolutely have some control/influence over a sizeable portion of the media that we consume, even the segments they don't technically "own".

Don't forget NBC /Universal/Comcast.

> pay $35

And make a quick buck on the side too!

That's a bargain compared to being on the wrong end of a federal copyright lawsuit.

Considering that the 'process' doesn't work (assumming the folks above are correct about being ignored), what makes you think you won't end up on the wrong end of a federal copyright lawsuit even after your $35 donation?

Could actually be a way to identify the pirates with money to waste, ie, the most sue-worthy.

Joel Embiid puts in the work, trust me.

But courts actually... do stuff.

And have some level of accountability.

You know what else is cheaper than court fees AND this ISP 'court' thing? Giving me $25. It's about as effective as this ISP 'court' thing too, maybe more since I promise that I will at least tell you "thank you."

Nah, the TOS probably has text buried in it that absolves them from any responsibilities.

And if not, there's always binding arbitration!

Neither of those can apply when the service itself was never actually provided.

"self regulation"

I don't think many people yet realize that this is what people are arguing for every time they say it's okay for a private company to not do business with whoever they dislike.