The FCC decision will basically tell Comcast to stop blocking BitTorrent and to disclose its practices to consumers (both are sorta moot points). It'll be challenged in court, which will take a long time and be messy, and either confirm or (most probably) deny the FCC's power to tell ISPs what to do.

The end result though, and what we're already seeing, is that ISPs will move away from network filters and get into data caps—which are FCC approved. Or at least, not disapproved. So, we've won—Comcast is getting thrashed—but we really haven't. [WSJ]

Martin's aim now is to punish Comcast via an order he is trying to push through his fellow commissioners. If passed, Comcast would be forced to stop P2P blocking, provide details on its P2P blocking practices and inform its customers about its plans for the future. Fortunately, he only has to secure two more votes on the five-person panel to make his plan a reality. And there are two Democrats on the commission that are staunch supporters of net neutrality and are likely to follow his lead. So it looks like Comcast will be getting the big FCC boot in its ass in the very near future. Bout' friggin' time if you ask me. UPDATE: The WSJ is reporting that Martin is not looking to add a fine in addition to the bill against Comcast. [AP via Arstechnica]

Most importantly, they need to embrace the internet, which includes BitTorrent. There's no sense in fighting it since people are currently using software like TED to automatically search for and download episodes of their favorite shows. It's like BitTorrent TiVo. West Coast users can even use it to download episodes shortly after it's done showing on the East Coast, giving them the ability to watch shows before broadcast and without commercials.

A source close to TiVo we spoke to says that they've looked at BitTorrent, but they need to differentiate between BitTorrent the protocol and BitTorrent in the sense that people are using it now to pirate shows. The current TiVos are designed to record two HD shows simultaneously, which leaves little power to run the fairly CPU-intensive BitTorrent protocol now. If there's a way to use it to help digital distribution in the future, TiVo will consider adding it. Here's how we think they can use the technology.

• Use BitTorrent to download shows legally. Say you somehow missed recording a show because they changed up the schedule from Tuesdays to Mondays (unlikely since TiVo auto-updates the guide, but still possible if your internet connection is down) or you forget to set a recording for a new series or you start watching a series in the middle. Why should you be punished into waiting until the entire season is out on DVD to watch this? If you're tech savvy enough, you've already been hitting the torrents and grabbing the episodes—or even seasons—you missed. Why not have TiVo centrally record a show, then let you torrent it out, complete with commercials, if you happen to miss recording it yourself? The ads keep the studios happy, and the fact that you get to watch a show keeps you happy.

• Enable peer to peer sharing. A company called NDS tried to do this in 2007 before legalities made it impossible. Picture being able to watch shows with your friends across the country at the same time, streamed from users who've already got that recording on their TiVos. Using BitTorrent will drastically reduce bandwidth costs on TiVo, but still give a very fast transfer rate to end users.

• Stream network's web content. ABC and NBC have both started getting into web video in a big way, putting their shows online for viewers to watch the next day on a browser. Extend this to a TiVo box (keeping the ads in so people who need to get paid get paid) and you're set.

• Stream your shows anywhere, including laptops, cellphones and other TiVo boxes. Yes, would essentially be a Slingbox built into a TiVo, allowing you to watch your shows on the go with your cellphones without any additional hardware. But why not have your living room TiVo networked together with the one in your bedroom? If you recorded Lost on one and Heroes on the other, you could stream it to each other without having to waste hard drive space doubly recording it.

• Download movies from every service. This is a tough one, but TiVo should expand their current Amazon Unbox movie service to include iTunes, Netflix and whatever service decides to pop up between now and doomsday. Be service agnostic and everyone will love you. DVDs don't distinguish between movies sold at Best Buy and movies sold at Circuit City.

But TiVo can't survive off of networking features alone; they need to expand the core functionality of the box as well. Here's what we're proposing.

• Auto encoding and syncing to devices. TiVoToGo is fine for grabbing shows off of your TiVo, encoding them and uploading it to your iPod when you've got lots of spare time, but if you're in a hurry, it's not nearly as convenient. A TiVo only needs all its CPU power when recording two HD shows, so they can easily use the excess cycles during idle times to automatically encode shows into a format your iPod or Zune can understand. All you have to do is simply dock your player into a USB port and choose the shows you want to carry with you.

• Messaging and communications. This ties into the peer to peer sharing feature above, but being able to have Xbox Live-like messages exchanged between your friends or even being able to chat with them while you're watching the same show (group chat!) would be phenomenal. Or if you don't want their jibber jabber during the show, just chat it up during commercials. A branded TiVo wireless keyboard and a wireless headset would be optional peripherals, or you can just hook up your own USB keyboard and USB headset.

• Ultimate file playback support. The one thing that's absolutely necessary to make the TiVo the core of the living room entertainment center is support for popular file formats. We're talking h.264, DivX, XviD, OGM, MKV, MOV, FLV, and anything else people encode their videos with. This way even users who don't have cable TV can get a TiVo and use it as a file dump for their BitTorrented shows and movies. Playing these files back easily in HD, without prior conversion, would truly make this the ultimate set top box.

Google just thinks that you have a right to know what your ISP is doing. If your ISP won't tell you, you should have the tools to figure out. In fact, according to one article cited by Hot Hardware, when net neutrality first started becoming an issue, at first Google considered just going along with ISPs: "We would come out fine—a non-neutral world would be a good world for us." Do no evil, eh? [Hot Hardware via /.]

It is more or less accepted that a minority of users use disproportionate of bandwidth, but what they're using it for is changing. It's increasingly video, not BitTorrent. The whole pro-BitTorrent thing is a smokescreen, because BitTorrent is less and less of an issue—video, and increasingly, HD video will be the real one. (Along with any number of other increasingly bandwidth-intensive apps.) And it'll be more and more competitive with providers' TV offerings—we've already seen Time Warner cry about it. But there's no legitimate way to block it and protect their content.

They can, however, make it more expensive for you to download with bandwidth caps (which is conveniently net neutral). And that's what I think this is partially about—protecting their TV business, not just curbing voracious bandwidth appetites. Regardless of the motivations, it's definitely coming. Comcast's tests will probably start soon, Time Warner's are already underway and regional ISPs have been doing it for a while. It's looking very much like the future of broadband here.

At least if we're using it less maybe the internet won't explode now. [Wired]

Speaking of Comcast, my Comcast internet is down for the second time in as many days. This has nothing to do with BitTorrent blockage, but I just felt like I had to share. [MPI-SWS via Crunchgear]

According to their data, "the results show a significant enough difference in the level of resets from one network operator to another, to warrant asking certain network operators to describe their network management practices," and AT&T, Cablevision and AOL are at the top of the heap. In our feature on ISP network management, while AT&T directly stated its "techniques don't include degrading or blocking traffic," they did decline to elaborate on what they did do.

While in Comcast's case, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told a Senate committee they lied about throttling torrents only during periods of congestion and never issued a flat denial, AT&T's repeated, direct counters incline us to believe them. But we still agree with Azureus's goal, to push ISPs to be completely transparent about how they manage their network—we'll leave whether the FCC should mandate net neutrality up to the policy wonks. Besides, it's looking like the FCC is moving toward transparency regulations anyway, if not neutrality. [PC World]

Other features include support for DLNA, NFS and SMB multimedia sharing and a 1TB single SATA hard drive on the TS-109 (2TB with an external eSATA or USB drive) or 2TB for the TS-209. Unfortunately, No pricing or release date information has been announced.

From the press release:

QNAP Announces Next Generation 500MHz CPU+256MB DDRII TS-109 Pro/TS-209 Pro II Turbo NAS Series

Taipei, Taiwan, April 2008 - The leading network-attached storage (NAS) provider QNAP Systems, Inc. today unveils the next generation Linux-embedded one-bay and two-bay NAS: TS-109 Pro II and TS-209 Pro II for power users, SOHO, and business users. The TS-109 Pro II and TS-209 Pro II series adopts high performance Marvell 500MHz CPU and 256MB DDRII large memory, which is a double of the memory size of the previous generation (TS-109/209 series) and becomes the best hardware specifications in the present SOHO NAS market. The Turbo NAS maintains superior system performance even if there are multiple accesses to various network services of the server concurrently. The new models are equipped with enhanced software functions, including the new BitTorrent download engine, built-in Joomla! CMS 1.5.1 for ease of PHP/MySQL-based web server hosting and upgraded TwonkyMedia version 4.4.4 for DLNA compliant media playing. Other professional features such as HDD S.M.A.R.T., complete log system, schedule backup from NAS to external storage device, etc. are also available. TS-109 Pro II and TS-209 Pro II series is the ideal choice of high performance and energy-saving NAS for modern business and home users.

Upgraded BT engine for high-speed download
Besides the outstanding hardware specifications, the BitTorrent download performance of TS-109 Pro II and TS-209 Pro II series is largely enhanced. The high-speed DHT mode and TCP/UDP tracker protocols are supported to overcome the drawbacks of slow download of general embedded systems. You can now enjoy the level of P2P download speed as PC-based BT download. The optional firmware with encrypted BT is also provided on QNAP website for users who are suffered from traffic shaping by ISP to increase the download speed! QNAP also provides the remote management software-QGet to allow you to manage the download tasks of multiple NAS servers remotely over the local network or the Internet. According to Mr. Laurent Cheng, Product Manager from QNAP, "Most power users are used to using PC for BT download. However, PC-based BT download is energy-consuming and the fan is always noisy. As the performance of embedded system improves and evolves, we strongly believe that QNAP's energy-saving Linux embedded NAS will become an alternative solution to replace PC as a download server."

Supports DLNA, NFS, SMB multimedia sharing to set up the home multimedia centre
QNAP NAS is the NAS device with the highest compatibility with tens of different DLNA media players, Sony PS3, and Microsoft Xbox360 gaming consoles. With the upgraded TwonkyMedia version 4.4.4, the popular DivX video can be streamed to Sony PS3 from NAS. Users can enjoy more of the music, photos, and video sharing function in the home network. Moreover, the Turbo NAS Pro series works well with NFS supported High-Definition (HD) DMA for HD video streaming. They can also be connected to XBMC (modded from Xbox gaming console) via SMB for media playing. The high compatibility, energy-saving and reliable features have made QNAP NAS the first choice for setting up the digital home multimedia centre.

Feature-rich NAS for modern business
The advanced functions which are only available in enterprise-level NAS models are now supported in QNAP Turbo NAS series. The HDD S.M.A.R.T. (Self-Monitoring Analysis and Reporting Technology) is supported for users to monitor the status of hard disk drive and check the potential problems. The comprehensive log system allows administrator to track the file-level connection logs and the status of all online users. The Turbo NAS provides numerous built-in functions which can be easily managed via the web interface, e.g. network storage, file server, encrypted FTP server, encrypted remote replication, printer server, etc. The intelligent backup software NetBak Replicator is also offered for users to back up data from multiple Windows PCs to the NAS. Also, Windows AD authentication is supported for efficient user account management and reduced maintenance cost.

About QNAP TS-109 and TS-209 Turbo NAS
QNAP TS-109 series supports up to 1TB single SATA hard drive. The total storage capacity can be expanded to 2TB with an external eSATA or USB drive. With the unique fanless design and aluminum alloy case, the noiseless TS-109 is suitable for operation in digital home environment. Moreover, the power consumption rate of TS-109 is less than 14.4W under normal operation. This energy-saving design enables the server to run 24x7 non stop. TS-109 series supports 12-in-1 complete functions and high transfer performance. TS-109 Pro was honored the "The Best NAS Box" from MAXIMUMPC (US), "Lord of NAS" from Hexus (UK), and "Golden Bear Award" from Bjorn3D (US) etc.

QNAP TS-209 series is the only 2-bay, RAID 1, hot-swappable NAS model in the current SOHO NAS market. With 12-in-1 functions, the maximum storage capacity supported is 2TB. TS-209 is a perfect large-storage and high security solution for home, SOHO, and SMB users. TS-209 Pro was honored "Gold Medal Award" from ComputerGEIL.dk (Denmark), Golden Award from InfoMods (France), and "Product of the Year 2007" from Hardware-TEST.dk (Denmark) etc.

He continues that "Based on testimony we've received thus far, this equipment was typically deployed over a wider geographic area or system, and is not even capable of knowing when an individual ... segment of the network is congested."

Honestly, the Comcast/P2P/net neutrality story is a bit played out, and frustrating, because nothing material has really happened, and I'm actually sort of tired of it. The major reason I'm posting this is because I was specifically told something by Comcast PR—which I gave the benefit of the doubt, because while PR cajoles and spruces, they rarely intentionally deceive—which the chairman of the FCC is stating to be categorically untrue. That's unfortunate, and disconcerting.

While we should always fact check, we shouldn't have to worry about being lied to. I'm waiting for them to get back to me, and I hope there's just some mixed signals going on here, but their response to Computerworld, that doesn't flat-out deny Martin's accusations, isn't very reassuring. [Computerworld via /.]

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin:

"Application designers need to understand what will and what will not work on the network, and consumers must be fully informed about the exact nature of the service they are purchasing."

"Particularly as broadband providers are trying to provide tiers of service, it's critical to make sure that we are understanding that the broadband network operators are able to deliver the speeds and service that they are selling."

Poor Comcast, it really is looking like their whole P2P vaudeville show might not stop the FCC after all. If none of this made any sense to you, check out our quick guide to ISPs and network practices, and what they mean for you. [Reuters]

The scariest scenario is invasive "packet filtering," where companies look at what you're downloading and punish you for perceived misconduct. Comcast was the poster child for BitTorrent throttling before getting cozy with it to avoid an FCC smackdown, and AT&T infamously broached the idea of filtering its entire network for copyrighted content. Beyond packet filtering, there are two potentially more widespread ways big ISPs can try to bring down the Torrent mad: "Caps," already used by local ISPs such as BendBroadband and Sunflower, are set amounts you can download each month. Anything over that, like cellphone plans, means overage penalties. "Throttling" is the ability of the ISP to, any given moment, put the brakes on your connection when you're being too much of a resource hog. Here's where the ISPs stand on the tactics above and your pipes.

AT&T

We have said consistently that AT&T will not allow itself to become a policeman or enforcement agent on the Internet. We have also made clear that there is nothing inherently wrong with P2P applications like BitTorrent, which are advanced, and legal, technologies that are used and welcomed on our network... We do not block or degrade any P2P application to manage network congestion. At the same time, we feel that any company involved with the Internet should be concerned about illegal activity, whether it is identity theft or intellectual property theft, and should be prepared to cooperate in legal means of addressing such problems while protecting fully the privacy of our customers.

Update: AT&T wrote in with an additional statement: "We can't give you details on our specific network management techniques to handle times of high-volume" citing similar reasons as Time Warner, "but those techniques don't include degrading or blocking traffic."

Comcast:
Here's the statement we got pre-BT chumminess, though we now know that Comcast is moving to a more management style that'll temporarly slow all traffic, whether it's cracked copies of Final Cut Pro from your favorite P2P or YouTube, to a drip during congestion:

We have a responsibility to provide all of our customers with a good Internet experience and we use the latest technologies to manage our network so that they can continue to enjoy these applications. During periods of heavy peer-to-peer congestion, which can degrade the experience for all customers, we use several network management technologies that, when necessary, enable us to delay—not block—some peer-to-peer traffic.

Comcast is not currently using or testing any filtering technologies. We agree that copyright owners have a right to protect their content. We work well with them under existing law and will continue to work with content owners to find solutions to help support their efforts around piracy. We cannot speculate on what AT&T is doing or how its technology works.

Speakeasy
They got back to us after we went to press, but here's what they had to say on network management: "Our position on this is that [we] attempt to manage our network to account for peak usage so that we do not need to throttle bandwidth of customers pending applications in order to keep our pipes unclogged." And on content filtering: "Speakeasy does not currently do any content filtering, and at this time we have no plans to filter content."

The Takeaway
Since BitTorrent became a rallying point for net neutrality advocates (and caught the attention of the FCC) ISPs have made a show of stepping back from P2P hampering to shield themselves from both nerd backlash and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's steely gaze. Verizon and AT&T, for instance, both pointed me toward their corporation-friendly "P4P" file-sharing development initiatives for more effective downloading (at an unknown cost), and Comcast has touted its R&D with BitTorrent.

All of that's a pretty effective smokescreen for moving to more hardcore capping and throttling, allowing them to cry "We treat all traffic equally, neutrally even!" while nuking all of your traffic without prejudice. Most people downloading the hugest amounts are probably not paying for all that content. And note that everyone except Verizon left themselves plenty of hedge space on the issue. Time Warner says it doesn't talk about it because it's afraid others will use it in marketing; well, Verizon is kinda sorta using their total lack of filtering as an underground marketing thing already, which is especially effective when coupled with FiOS's insane speeds.

Even with ever-higher speeds, bandwidth will remain an issue for ISPs as they try to cram more and more HD content down pipes you're using to download movies, swap music and other increasingly bandwidth-intensive applications. So more management is going to go hand and hand with more bandwidth, make no mistake.

But it doesn't have to be a bad thing, if they're smart about it. They make a genuine movement to smarter protocols and management techniques that don't hose anyone's broadband (like that P4P stuff, if it's really open), but instead help everyone squeeze every last bit out of it as efficiently as possible. We can only hope.

Though the European Parliament has plenty of power, this particular legislation seems to be more for advisory purposes. The BBC says:

The vote has no legal force and leaves national governments free to implement their own anti-piracy plans. But, said the Open Rights Group, it does "signify resistance" among European law makers to the strict measures that nations such as France are implementing.

"Protocol agnostic" sounds a lot like net neutrality, treating all data equally, be it P2P or FTP. Except in this case, it means slowing all packets equally when traffic reaches an unacceptable volume. Under the current system, which was described as "surgical" in its precision when we talked to Comcast about it just a few days ago, only the torrent uploads of super traffic hogs (something like the 5 percent worst abusers, similar to Time Warner's estimation) are delayed, and only when and where there's heavy congestion. So, you could be hammering the shit out of your connection on FTP, and you wouldn't see the kind of management being applied to someone on the block using torrent if the network was congested.

Now, it doesn't matter how you're raping the connection—they slow your whole pipe down if you're "disproportionately" swallowing bandwidth when the network's congested (I'm repeating that phrase to emphasize that's the only time they hit the nuke button), whether it's BitTorrent or you have 100 YouTube vids running at once. It's a nice marketing move: Comcast actually gets to engage in stiffer throttling while gaining credit for easing off BitTorrent. What's good is that it's promising to be extremely upfront and transparent about how and why it manages traffic, which takes the evil bite out of the practice.

But it also makes it more acceptable to the average Joe, clearing the way for every ISP to do so: "Hey, we told you we might do it."

Another reason they made the switch? To try to keep the FCC from laying down net neutrality rules, which no ISP seems to want. Head honcho Kevin Martin has a huge hard-on for reaming the cable industry, in particular Comcast, and the recent dustup with BitTorrent had the FCC seriously considering laying down net neutrality rules for the first time. In my dealings, Comcast and BitTorrent execs actually seem pretty friendly toward one another; presumably they wanted to work it out without the government stepping in.

The people who want net-neutrality regulation may get their wish in the end, since Martin still isn't impressed with the show of friendship:

"While it may take time to implement its preferred new traffic management technique, it is not at all obvious why Comcast couldn't stop its current practice of arbitrarily blocking its broadband customers from using certain applications. Comcast should provide its broadband customers as well as the Commission with a commitment of a date certain by when it will stop this practice.

First, the good news: Comcast and BitTorrent are joining forces to "run BitTorrent's technology more smoothly on Comcast's broadband network, and allow Comcast to transport video files more effectively over its own network in the future." Yes, Comcast is going to embrace net neutrality completely by the end of the year, allowing all sites and programs equal access to bandwidth. Hey, that's a change of policy, right? Can't complain about that. That doesn't mean Comcast is now the ISP of choice for heavy BT users, however.

Comcast CTO Tony Warner says that "Rather than slow traffic by certain types of applications — such as file-sharing software or companies like BitTorrent — Comcast will slow traffic for those users who consume the most bandwidth." So feel free to use BitTorrent, just don't use it too much or your speeds will dip down to nothing.

This will probably lead to the end of all-you-can-eat broadband plans and force heavy downloaders to pay extra for all their bandwidth in the near future. But hey, at least everything is on the level now, right? At least we think so. [WSJ via TorrentFreak]

[Myka]

Adelstein half dodged that with a question: "The problem is, how can you ever tell what's illegal?" Well you can't, not without some serious filtering and snooping by ISPs, and a lot of wrangling over whether uploading or downloading is deemed piracy. And what about telling the difference between illegally sharing a movie from a big studio, and sharing an independently-produced movie designed for P2P sharing? Clearly, the FCC isn't comfortable going all in for content filtering, at least not yet.

We'll just have to watch to see what this implies for the final net neutrality guidelines. [Ars Technica]

"The time has come for a specific enforceable principle of nondiscrimination. This principle should allow for reasonable network management, but make crystal clear that broadband network operators cannot shackle the promise of the Internet."

Here's why I'm a Kevin Martin fanboy: He called out Comcast for selling tiered bandwidth packages while crapping up the service at the same time, saying "it's a little odd" before asking, "Doesn't it undermine your arguments and isn't it inconsistent?"

Topping it off, the NY Attorney General just subpoenaed Comcast for information about its non-neutral network practices, so we might be looking at even more regulatory beatdowns.

It sucks to be Comcast right now, but I've never been happier with the FCC. [NYT, NYT]

Blizzard, like The Pirate Bay, implements a P2P system. Instead of avoiding issues of copyright, the developer utilizes P2P as an inexpensive way to distribute WoW updates and patches. And the last time we played WoW, which was admittedly some time ago, Blizzard's P2P updater was pretty much mandatory to play the game. So if you're thinking what we're thinking, The Pirate Bay may have jumped the gun with their announcement. And Blizzard may actually be the sleeper king of P2P. [slycknews via slashdot]

The system will run an (optional) $500 premium when it's unrolled, and obviously, such a system can only be as good as its network. Eventually, CarTorrent could be a whole lot more that a way to share small amounts of information—it could be a way for cars to communicate in times of crisis, allowing car computers to sync in split-second decision territory where individual drives could fail.

Of course, many of us realize what CarTorrent really is: a means for cars to eventually assemble into a giant Megatron and destroy all of mankind (pending oil prices stay in check). [guardianunlimited via digg][image: gettyimages]

Comcast maintains it only "delays" traffic and is "not blocking anything," swearing stuff will get to where it's going eventually—traffic shaping, which a lot of ISPs do. But according to the AP and EFF, they're actually forging packets telling both ends of a connection the other side doesn't want to play, killing it like innocent children on a playground.

Hart's seeking class-action status for the suit, disclosure of traffic shaping—or blockage, as it were—in ads and a ban on blocking applications. All reasonable, though if goes class action and prevails, it won't probably won't look so reasonable to Comcast's coffers. [Ars Technica, Flickr]

Yep, Chan Nai-ming got three months in jail, a month each for Daredevil, Miss Congeniality and Red Planet. I mean, Miss Congeniality I understand, but Red Planet???? The Court of Appeal were swayed in the end not so much by the man's behavior but by his online handle, "Big Crook." Excuse me while I change my screen name to "InnocentGuy2077." – Wilson Rothman

Hong Kong online movie pirate loses appeal [Reuters]

The NAS and BitTorrent functions can be administered using any Web brower. It supports hard drive hot swapping and RAID 0 or 1. While it is not as as sophisticated as a Drobo, it will keep all your music and pr0n movies safe while being fully Digital Living Network Alliance v1.0 compliant and iTunes compatible. In addition to the obligatory Gigabit Ethernet port (sadly no 802.11n, but good enough), the Jack In The Box also has a Secure Digital/Multimedia Card slot.

Sadly, it looks like it's Japan only and there's no official price for now (but it's expected to debut at shops for $333). If it ever comes to the US, watch out for the RIAA, who may be looking for that other thing in a box if they catch you using one of these, right after the jump.

–Jesus Diaz

Product page (japanese) [PCI via PC Watch]

I mean, why waste computer processing time when you just can do it with style and use this Procare e|Share ES-8068, a dedicated BitTorrent client that you can set up using a Web browser? After that, without using your PC at all, it will connect directly to the Internet using Ethernet, storing files in a USB 2.0 hard drive, and Bob's your uncle. Or Blackbeard. Or Captain Sparrow. Or Geena Davis. Whatever floats your boat, matey. You can buy it for $85 plus shipping, patch and parrot not included. – Jesus Diaz

Product page [Procare via PC Watch]

Not that we would encourage piracy or anything, but Movinflicks.com is offering a heckuva lot of links to movies—many of which you saw win Oscars last night—for free viewing, immediately and in all their full-screen glory. Find out more about our experience with the site:

The movies aren't actually offered in HD as they are purported to be, but we were able to get them to play back perfectly. Of course, now that we've mentioned this obviously soon-to-be-slam-dunked-by-the-MPAA service, it will quickly be overwhelmed with traffic and ultimately brought to its knees.

But the site is just providing links to the pirated movies, right? Well, that's illegal, too. Maybe linking to the linker is illegal, too. Uh-oh. You'll have to find Movinflicks.com on your own. Maybe even glancing at the Movinflicks.com site is illegal. Is that a knock at the door? – Charlie White

Movie content is provided by Twentieth Century Fox, Paramount, Warner Bros., and MGM, and will sit alongside free videos uploaded by users. Exceedingly lame, however, is that all of the studio movies are rentals only, imploding 30 days after you download one or a day after you start watching it.

New flicks go for $3.99, older ones for $2.99. TV show stuff is standard—$1.99 to buy (and keep). Since they're wrapped up in Windows Media Player DRM, you can guess where, how and on what they'll play (or not). Observation: Microsoft must be making a killing licensing their DRM to people, since most of the big digital movie distributors other than iTunes use it.

While overall I find these services to be ill-conceived, limiting and wholly unsatisfactory, if you do decide to buy crippled, overpriced content, a NYT test showed that thanks to BT's p2p setup, it took less time to download a movie than it did from Wal-Mart. Moreover, it seems to solve the issues that the Xbox 360 download service ran into on the first day.

The real question is: "Can BitTorrent compete against itself?" The BT network already offers a vastly superior catalog of content without restrictions (or cost), albeit not so legally. Something else to consider: since they're using your bandwidth to distribute content users pay for, why aren't purchases subsidized according to how much someone uploads?

Verdict: Call us when someone launches a store that offers content worth paying for. Unfortunately, Hollywood doesn't seem so keen on making that happen. – Matt Buchanan

Software Exploited by Pirates Goes to Work for Hollywood [NYT]

In fact, pirated copies of movies and TV shows are often available in HD, in their original 16x9 format. Not so with a TV show or movie from iTunes: its sides are chopped off in 4x3, and it's not available in HD. Doesn't this remind you of the days of Napster, when there was no other way to legally download music? Legal video downloading is having a hard time keeping up. That's what the writer of the-ish.com/blog noticed as he compared one against the other:

Sounds to me like legality, and even the convenience of auto-downloads, are having a hard time competing with pirating. But what it really comes down to for me is this: If i get LESS INFORMATION from my legal purchase, if i cant even get widescreen (much less HD) then why should i be purchasing instead of pirating?

iTunes versus Pirating (Digg mirror) [the-ish.com/blog, via Digg]

Planex updates its BitTorrent NAS [Akihabara News]

More deets and Netgear's Storage Central Turbo after the jump.

Using the same proprietary software to deal with the TV tuner, It also supports iTunes, though the uncomfortable silence from the reps indicates the officialness of that is iffy at best, so we'll see if that particular feature makes it to market. You can, however, hook up your iPod, as well as any other mp3 player or mass storage device. Rounding out the package is the "follow me" feature, which allows you to pause a movie on one receiver, and then resume it on a receiver in another room. Granted, that means you need of two these babies, which is not a cheap proposition at $349 a pop. Or you can use party mode, which plays everything synchronously all of the receivers on the network. Oh, and it has direct access to Youtube. Woohoo? Drops in early '07.

Netgear also showed off the Storage Central Turbo (pictured above), a network storage setup which supports "terabytes of SATA storage" and fail-safe disk mirroring (though you have to supply your own hard drives.) They claimed it's 6x-7x faster than any other network storage device with gigabit speeds, with the ability to transfer an HD movie in about 10 minutes. Same vague release time frame as DEHD, $249. – Matt Buchanan