I'll try to give you a big-picture answer that will be very incomplete because, in the time allotted to you and to all of us, this complex issue won't be solved.
The big picture is pretty simple. There's general agreement that the major economic frictional loss in the chain of payment for content is that ISPs charge from $40 to $60 to $100 a month for essentially the majority of what people pay for as subscribers: music, television programs, and movies. My own experience at Harvard University, where I was a Fellow at the Berkman Center, included many studies to show this, and they have been validated by other studies done all over the world.
So you have a situation where you have one particular player who is essentially getting paid for and monetizing stuff that they are not paying for, and because the copyright system does not recognize that kind of Internet pass-through as touching the content, two things happen. Number one, nobody who made the content gets paid. They don't have licences. Number two, the ISPs are prevented from entering into a legal business that would be notionally much more profitable than the business they're in.
That's my opinion. It was buried in one line of my brief testimony.