Filed under: Internet, Social Software
Comcast could receive hefty FCC fine for throttling Bit Torrent traffic
Remember October's news of Comcast throttling Bit Torrent traffic? The debacle not only created a firestorm of bad press for the nation's largest cable provider but also re-ignited the nationwide debate about Net Neutrality. We had numerous signs that Comcast was inhibiting our use of this legal and legitimate file transfer protocol, but to have the AP catch them red handed was icing on the cake.To add to our pleasure, we learned today that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has finally taken notice of Comcast's indiscretion as well. According to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, a group of consumer advocates and legal scholars have asked the commission to look into Comcast discriminating against specific types of data (read: Bit Torrent). The groups have also requested the FCC to fine Comcast $195,000 per affected subscribers. In case you were wondering, at last report, Comcast has 9.1 million subscribers.
We don't really think Comcast will be forced to fork out the projected $1.77 trillion, but we do hope they get scraped through the mud on this one. They completely disregarded their entire customer base and should receive far more than just bad press as a result of this. If you are a company and you're going to filter network traffic, be transparent and disclose it up front. If not, be ready to pay up to Mr. Martin.
[via Mashable]
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 2)
JHilsee said 4:31PM on 1-09-2008
"I know it sounds harsh to favor anybody over anybody else, but the fact of the matter is that even with recent capacity upgrades, there's still a limit to the size of the pipe and bandwidth still costs money in the end."
I understand the logic behind this, but this really isn't a problem. My internet now is fine, let's keep it the way it is. There's no need to make up some special plan for each user just for Comcast to squeeze more profit out of people.
And yes, there is a limit to the size of the pipe. BUT, you have a bandwidth cap now, so it's not a problem. It's large, but it's there, and it's there to prevent this "bandwidth whoring" problem.
And even if that did become the case, there'd still be other service providers.
The scenario you're describing is not going to happen.
Reply
Post On Fire said 5:15PM on 1-09-2008
I think as the technology progresses cable users will fade away bit by bit because the satellite will be taking over specially in remote areas where cable solutions are not feasible.
http://www.postonfire.com
Reply
John S said 6:46PM on 1-09-2008
I agree with James that we are selfish to expect high speed unlimited bandwidth without it affecting other customers.
We ether have to find a way to increase bandwidth and fast.
Or we will have to accept bandwidth limits to keep the playing field fair for everyone. I think one thing that could work is to open bandwidth up late at night to early AM when usage is down. This would benefit all and would keep customers happy.
Reply
Chaos Motor said 7:02PM on 1-09-2008
"If you are a company and you're going to filter network traffic, be transparent and disclose it up front."
No, DON'T DO IT. People pay for ACCESS, that's IT. They don't pay for the gatekeeper to decide what does and doesn't go through. In fact, fuck the gatekeeper. Read my entry at
http://chaosmotor.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/services-middlemen-and-gatekeepers/
for more on gatekeepers and what I'm doing to eliminate this scourge.
Reply
frank peter said 7:22PM on 1-09-2008
Shit, I never though comcast could close down as well, There was the funniest joke about comcast the other day, www.opentopix.com/topic/tech-news/comcast-to-close-down
Reply
xxx said 7:53PM on 1-09-2008
That's a LOT of moneyyyy!!! too much I think
http://www.spymac.com/details/?2330673
Reply
chris said 2:51AM on 1-10-2008
What you may be overlooking so people will open this article, is that of the 9.1 million subscribers, how many were truly troubled by this. I work for the company in question and I am well aware of how many people actually called about this in my market. The truth is, not many.
Reply
Greenman said 6:14PM on 1-10-2008
It comes down to this: Is access to the net a privilege or a right? Those of us who believe it is a right look towards history and rulings regarding similar "common carrier" services.
http://www.artsandmedia.net/cgi-bin/dc/newsdesk/2003/12/02_net_neutrality
Just because someone doesn't know the protocol is available doesn't make it right to limit it. If we let the camel put its nose in the tent, it won't be long before the camel owns the tent. This 'camel' is meant to serve the needs of society - to build community - not to serve the needs of the camel.
Shannon said 6:54PM on 1-10-2008
I had no idea. I'm canceling my Comcast service. Does anybody know of a list of ISPs who have a clean record?
Reply
Greenman said 5:55PM on 1-10-2008
Charter has been throttling torrent traffic too - and poorly. I've got several versions of linux that I'm interested in. If I'm on bittorrent for more than an hour, web traffic slows to worse-than-dialup for everyone behind my router. Turn off bittorrent, and about half a day later, speeds pick up.
Mr. Martin needs to fine Charter too. It's just rude to think we won't realize what's happening.
Reply
Dani said 12:41PM on 1-14-2008
I agree with Andrew. For those of you who are not in "the know" of what is going on with Comcast let me assure you that there are faster speeds that will be available in the very near future. Comcast is working out solutions to this problem, not adding to it.
The fact of the matter is that you are getting what you pay for. If you want FiOS, then get it, but their speed (for the same price as comcast's 6Mb) is only 5Mb...so have fun trying to download with that. They don't even have a power boost...it just is what it is. You want more? You will pay more. Oh, and let me remind you....You're internet will only be as fast as your modem/gateway/router/computer can process ....so maybe it's time for you to make some updates yourself.
I'm glad that there is probably some throttling going on. Why should I get less because some JA next door has some huge file to download. I think it's fair this way.
Oh, and about that lock box on the side of the building....If jerks weren't constantly busting these open to try and steal cable, then maybe the cover would stay up. It wouldn't hurt you to try and close it up either you know...It's not that hard, I promise you wont break a nail =)
Reply
Cozmo said 2:07AM on 1-13-2008
Well I think that sounds a bit steep for a fine, but I do hope something is done about it.
Reply
Steve said 9:20PM on 1-13-2008
Really, Snipes? Take a look at your local streetcorner or highway, Snipes. This should not surprise you..as the U.K. IS NO LONGER A FREE COUNTRY..AND THE U.K.'s VOTERS ALLOWED THIS!!
Reply
Billie said 4:05AM on 1-14-2008
Comcast is also spying on people mail and what they dl. This is a fact!
Reply