The excuse I've seen trotted out is that a mismatch between the expected security guarantee impled by the URI scheme and the actual security guarantee of a particular connection. The http URI scheme warns the user in advance of a true lack of security, while https with an unknown certificate authority gives the user a false sense of security. StartSSL offers free personal use TLS certificates anyway.

People who just flat-out pirate a game, movie, or album have made exactly this same excuse on Slashdot.

Which court in which case used this as an argument in its opinion to dismiss an antitrust action?

Not free, but Cogent is willing to pay these costs itself. Verizon and Comcast won't take Cogent's offer; they want to charge Cogent an arguably excessive markup on top of Cogent's costs

But how feasible is it for a typical U.S. resident to qualify for a work visa in your country?

And consumer groups have historically been less effective at raising campaign contributions than industry groups. A lot of these consumer advocacy organizations are organized as not-for-profit organizations, which cannot contribute to campaigns. Some, such as NORML Foundation, have an affiliated political action committee, but which PAC is aligned with the interests of (say) Consumers Union, FSF, or EFF?

Many Slashdot users share a household or an extended family with someone who watches sports.

Then you have to buy two more computers: one to use as the back end and one to use in the living room as the front end. Or which pre-configured MythTV back end device for recording OTA video and which pre-configured MythTV front end device for the living room should a non-technical user buy?

Onto what computer? Can someone install it on a household's only computer without A. losing ready access to the PC applications on which one depends or B. harming the recording in progress when the computer restarts for security updates? Non-technical users expect home entertainment equipment to be as reliable as a DVD player, cable box, or unmodded video game console. No, "get your ass off Slashdot if you're not a technical user" is not a constructive answer because if MythTV is not for non-technical users, non-technical users will continue to fill the coffers of the pay-television establishment.

All makes and models, or is it like the "winmodem" era where Ubuntu has no driver for a lot of the devices out there?

Even if the cable box encrypts the FireWire output with DTCP?

"Sure, but HD units require HD service, which will be another $18.00 per month."

You mean recording OTA with MythTV? You still have to buy a device to dedicate to recording and subscribe to listings.

That depends on how much you want to pay TiVo per month for DVR service.

Is that alone, or on top of what you already pay the cable company for high-speed Internet access?

Perhaps the "news" is that more influential columnists have become aware of the practical problems in MPAA members' business models. (CBS shares a corporate parent with Paramount Pictures.)

And now you know why some video game publishers have decided to take down or at least claim ad revenue on Let's Play videos on copyright grounds. You have admitted the existence of a demographic for which a complete playthrough video substitutes for buying the game itself.

Hence HBO's recent announcement of plans to expand HBO Go into a standalone over-the-top service, because people have shown themselves willing "to pay what HBO charges", just not what the local multichannel pay television provider charges.

In the USA, you can do your part. Take what you would have paid for HBO and give it to your local PBS station.