Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Sued Over Internet Data Gathering
saikou writes: "Slashdot already had an article about Comcast using transparent cache systems to track their cable modem users' browsing habits (purely for improvment of their networks, of course) and now here's the follow-up. Newsbyte posted yesterday a story about the lawsuit, demanding $100 per day of tracking for each customer. I guess even if it will work out, customers might get oh, say, $10. With rest being a fee for the lawyer(s) :)" Update: 05/25 12:37 GMT by T : burgburgburg points to a New York Times article about the case, and reminds you of two previous mentions of the controversial user-tracking effort (one, two).
I'm just going to assume that the tracking comes from the possiblity of the merge with AT&T. The freep had a really good article yesterday about Comcast not being too happy with the bandwidth consupmtion from users.
"Comcast points out that it is not cheap to provide high-speed service to a million customers, as it does now. At its network operations center in Cherry Hill, N.J., workers electronically monitor more than 50,000 pieces of equipment throughout the company's broadband network."
It wouldn't be surprising if they were tracking "equipment" (users more like it) to see who the bandwidth "hogs" are.
Better take advantage of Usenet acess while it lasts!
The right to swing *their* fist stops where the customers nose begins.
There are limits to what you can do with your property,
and those limits are in part defined by injury it causes others.
If you want to do something as egregious as Comcast
(i.e. something your customers wouldn't reasonably expect you to do)
then you had damn well better state that up front in large print.
In other words, it is like they like they don't have a right
to maintain their network anyway they want.
Unless the TOS states in large print
"WE WILL LOG YOUR ACTIVITY AND SELL IT TO THIRD PARTIES"
then they are at fault.
There are limits, and Comcast exceeded them.
-- this is not a