The same information is in articles from Slashdot, CNet, Wired, The Washington Post, etc.

$1.25 million collectively is chump change for any of these companies much less all three combined.

I am not sure of your point here. It is not the money, it is where the money went to.

A threat is just that until action is taken.

Yet a threat carries a certain weight of force behind it which is the point of the whole thing.

While it may be true that the ISP’s wanted to get rid of Usenet groups, it is also true that this action by the AG of New York forced them to either close it down or face legal action.

This is the sort of thing the Center for Justice & Democracy is approving of.

These are the same companies that want to start charging by total bandwidth useage and “inspecting” every packet you send and receive so they can push selected advertising to your computer.

An article from the NY Times contains this quote:

“After the companies ignored the investigators’ complaints, the attorney general’s office surfaced, threatening charges of fraud and deceptive business practices. “

and….

“As part of the agreements, the three companies will also collectively pay $1.125 million to underwrite efforts by Mr. Cuomo’s office and the center for missing children to purge child pornography from the Internet.”

So let’s see…. the companies are threatened with lawsuits and criminal investigations from Cuomo’s office and in response, they “give” a boatload of money to that same office.

Although there may be a component of the companies wanting to limit Usenet groups, it certainly appears that the threats by Cuomo were a part of the “forcing” done here.

More than likely they cut a back room deal, Cuomo comes off looking like he’s tough on pervs and the ISPs get rid of a cash albatross. A win-win for everybody but the consumer.