This makes them a good citizen in the eyes of the FCC but their alternative plan spreads the pain. 250GB may sound like a lot but househoulds with a few music lovers with a penchant for downloading movies and TV shows can burn through 250GB without a problem.

I understand Comcast predicament. They want to push their cable TV and ISP services. Hulu, NetFlix on Demand and other video services are eating into one Comcast revenue stream while overburdening and underpaying for another one. I feel your pain.

On the other hand, Comcast gets a fixed amount from each customer each month even if they don't use the service. Will Comcast introduce a rebate for customers who download, say less than 25GB month? I doubt it. They make money by offering "all you can eat" Internet access without having to increase their peak capacity.

We could argue about regulators and business models for years and get now where on this question. Unfortunately where it will really matter is when broadly available, free WiFi services envisioned by the FCC becomes a reality. Then we may get to the point where coming up with reasonable tiered pricing structures makes sense. Until then, we keep seeing small cases like this that test the waters but don't jump in head first to address the fundamental problem.

See ComputerWorld for more on the Comcast story.