Perhaps not federally, but there are plenty of state laws:

http://www.ncsl.org/research/f...

This indicates that cash discounts are legal under all agreements:

http://fso.cpasitesolutions.co...

Surcharges for credit cards are against ToS, but discounts for cash or some other method of payment are not, but law.

They will credit your money back the next day, but they likely won't credit all the overdraft charges that occurred while your account was at zero due to the fraudulent charges. And since they have your checking account number, not a debit card number (which is processed by Visa / MC, meaning they are still in the loop), you don't get these protections anyway.

I just don't understand the $8 streaming concept. You pretty much just get old TV shows and crap movies. I'd gladly pay $25 a month for decent and current movies. I have Netflix and like watching some old TV shows, but I rarely watch movies, since it's almost impossible to find anything good.

I have Verizon TV and have seen commercials for it, but still didn't know what it was exactly. Or cared enough to find out. Verizon already rented movies via the VOD, so seemed pointless.

Wouldn't that be a colonal mass ejection? Pretty much by definition.

Developing for any device (successfully) would be difficult without a device, regardless of platform. You can get iPod Touches fairly cheap on eBay. You do, however, need to pay Apple $99/year to be an iOS developer, however. But for that, they'll distribute all your apps for no additional charge (assuming your app is free.) Android development tools are free, but you pretty much have to have a device to do anything. Their "simulator" is worthless.

Maybe you have a crappy TV. My Wii looks great on my 8 year old Sony SXRD 1080P TV, even up close. However, it has a much better upscaler than most TVs, I'd guess.

So, the answer is, contact a lawyer for a possible class action law suit against Comcast for deceptive billing. I'd bet this is just about the OP's only option, since most people would assume network overhead isn't counted. If it is, litigation is likely the only recourse.

And what happens if someone holds up a document to the window? Perhaps that might be a problem, too. If you want good security, don't have windows.

Most of the people I see with Samsung phones can't spell lawyer, so I don't think it's going to matter.

I'd bet you can voluntarily "license" expired patents, if you desire to do so. It will all come down to the wording on the agreement. I'd bet Samsung will lose, since they are even more slimy than Microsoft and Microsoft has proven one thing over the years: they have good lawyers. (Whereas, Samsung has largely proven the opposite for their lawyers.)

Most apps perform way, way faster all the while using significantly less data than do web sites. This may be more a ding against most web sites, but is valid none the less. I use a number of apps that can fetch their data and display it before a mobile browser has even pulled down the main content, let alone the 20 JavaScript libraries, 12 crap affiliate site icons/links and the countless images that add nothing.

However, some apps are worse than their mobile web site versions, e.g. most news sites.

My own company's mobile app, which I developed, can typically refresh a page in under 25 ms via 3G. Plus, customers prefer the apps to the mobile web sites.

My guess is ICANN would pay it, too.

They noted "This is a natural partnership for us" and I was thinking, "what, the Hulu executives are a bunch of foul-mouthed caricatures?" As you noted, they are the brainchild of broadcast networks, so perhaps, yes. I think the characters on South Park may have demonstrated more business savvy than these executives, though.

But, same deal here, I'll never pay for Hulu anything. If Netflix doesn't offer it or I can't otherwise find it, I just don't need to watch it.