Slashdot Mirror
Toledo Uncappers Getting Shafted
Jacob writes "Broadband Reports has a well written article detailing the plight of those Ohio cable modem users who found themselves facing gun wielding FBI agents for uncapping their cable modems. Buckeye Cable has clearly crossed a line and the tech community and consumer groups should be all over them like a wet, angry rag. Kudos to Broadband Reports for not letting this thing die." Granted, those who were indicted were violating their service contracts, but having their posessions siezed by FBI agents is overkill.
I think the "Drug War" opened up the laws that allow this. Basically, an arrest is made against the property itself for being involved in the crime, and I have no idea what the options are to get it back.
Yes, I do indeed love this country.
The only Toledo cable company is owned by a family of lunatic bastards (Block Communications) who also own the only Toledo newspaper. They will never see a dime of my money for broadband! I use a local wireless provider and get about 5Mbit up and down for the same price as Buckeye's broadband. I understand that Time/Warner is coming into the area. Good for them! They will put a stop to the Block monopoly.
they are making examples of these folks. Try modding your x-box, downloading mp3s, violating TOS, cable theft,etc. and maybe you will be the next example.
Certain entities don't like it when you break their rules. In one sense you are not paying for their service, in another sense you are not stopping them from selling it to the neighbors. But, I don't think they would have been caught if they weren't causing some problems by using excessive bandwidth.
Karma: Censored (mostly affected by decency laws)
cable modem users who found themselves facing gun wielding FBI agents
Hate to break it to ya, but FBI agents usually wear their sidearms even when off duty, and having them out when raiding a residence is standard (and smart, too - don't want agents being shot while they scramble for a weapon.
The gun wielding thing was added to the original article for sensationalism - the linked article in the original writeup didn't make a single mention of guns.
Sheesh... the outrage here over SOP (on behalf of people clearly guilty of theft of services). Bandwidth costs $$$ and I hope they get in a nice amount of trouble for what they did.
WTF are you getting those numbers? 2.5Mbps cable line here in NS, Canada is $40CND/month ($25US). Perhaps the real problem is that the people with the keys to the onramp are being a little to stingy in the US?
> GET REAL.
Although I admit I am probably no more innocent than these poor saps, I agree with most of the folks here who feel that the punishment didn't fit the crime.
Up until a bit ago, this was very valid criticism. Typically, one node could provide 30Mbps to a neighborhood, and a single cable modem could snatch up a max of 10Mbps of that for its own use. It was a lot like being plugged into a hub. When usage spiked, you were in collision city. However, cable providers have started sending out configuration files to cable modems telling them to only snag a certain amount of bandwidth.
And putting the throttle in the equipment at the customer end of the cable was a big mistake, opening a major can of worms. (Especially given that some customers own their own equipment...) Makes it vulnerable to tampering, leading the company into playing "whack-a-mole", in this case with a BIG mallet.
The proper solution is to do the throttling at the head end. Downstream you can limit bandwidth with a subscriber management box between the head end and the backbone. Upstream the cable systems assign timeslots to each modem from a central box. So you can limit upstream bandwidth by limiting the timeslots. (Or just have the SMS drop the extra packets - which will cause TCP connections to throttle back.)
Of course that means the cable companies have to buy an SMS, rather than pestering the FBI to bust their subscribers.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The article correctly stated that the cable company's claim of 100/100 was complete bullshit, as that's theoretically impossible.
For those of you who don't work near the ISP industry, bandwidth is --VERY EXPENSIVE--. $200 per megabit per month is an absolute STEAL (to get that rate, you need to be buying it on the DS3 level). $400 per meg is more realistic on lower levels.
Two words for you. <b>Shared Bandwidth</b>. If bandwidth was *really* that expensive, you wouldn't see 3MBit DSL connections for $70 CDN/month, including the modem rental.
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
"Where are the guns?" SOP for Federal BI Agents in ALL circumstances is to be armed... and ready.
The firearms were most likely in holsters on their hips. If you are referring to an "Elian" style raid (with said Agents brandishing MP5s and wearing balaclavas) then you are most likely correct that the article sensationalises the situation.
However... any armed Agent wandering around anyones house in search of a frigging uncapped modem, and evidence to such, is a serious liability in any age. In other words, the alleged crime does not fit the method of search and seizure involved. This matter could be more easily, and less expensively to the taxpayer, dealt via private litigation.
cheers
front
What did they do that was so dead wrong? They in essence gained access to some extra bandwidth in which they were allowed to use. Consequences should immediate termination of the account end of story.
Hmm...this is interesting. It seems to me just about everyone is missing the point here. One poster suggests this is just a normal consequence of breaking the law, ignoring the fact that the normal consequence in this instance would -and should- simply be termination of service. It leaves me wondering if folks here read the same story I did.
What happened here is nothing new, really. Read up on characters such as Huey Long. Anyone ever hear of Tammany Hall? A local political machine with aspirations of grandeur had their toes stepped on...they are stepping back. I'm not saying this is right, far from it. But everyone seems to have missed that there is a corrupt political machine right in the foreground of the story. Wannabe empire builders, petty kings, whatever you want to call them. It's an old story here in America, and this won't be the last time it is played out either.
__
The optimist proclaims we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this may be true.
You're a little conservative on max line bandwidth. You can get up to around 7.5M. Up or down, it doesn't matter, cable isn't asymmetrical. The only reason cable companies make caps like they do is because no ISP in their right mind wants more data going out of their network than is coming in. It screws up their figures for determining by how much they can oversell their backbone link(s). Which is, not coincidentally, why most TOSes have a stipulation that you can't run any servers. Backbone providers don't care, obviously, there's no difference in direction for them. But I digress, your numbers are a little off, but your point is spot on. What Buckeye did was fabricate numbers in order to fraudulently utilize the resources of the FBI. I'm no big fan of the FBI, but shades of Operation Sundevil aside, there'd better be some accounting for this.
Due Process went out of the door when the Government decided to start the "War on Drugs." They are expanding this even further with the "War on Terrorism."
Anybody with an IQ over 100 and a copy of the Constitution can tell you that law enforcement agencies should not be able to do something like this. Yet they do it all the time, even when they have absolutely no intention of pressing charges againt the people they do it to.
If you are suspected of being a drug dealer, you are in danger of having property such as your car or house being seized by police and auctioned off to the highest bidder, even if you are never officially charged.
There are some links to info at the LP homepage, I believe (http://www.lp.org).
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
They were violating a civil contract, which is different.
I guess you are not a lawyer. While you may have violated a civil contract if you uncapped a modem, the fact is that you ALSO broke criminal laws. For example Texas has several state laws that include penalties of up to 6 months in jail for theft of cable services.
If I walk into a store and shoplift, say $500 worth of merchandise and get caught the consequences can include a felony conviction.
The fact is that what these people did was just as severe a crime. Now maybe the concept of the FBI actually making the arrest bothers some people, but in reality is that any different from the local or state police making the arrest? Probably not, in fact I would expect that the FBI would be a lot more professional about the whole thing.
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
I called Buckeye (419-724-9800) and they said that the FCC has something to do with it, saying that uncapping cable modems causes signal leaks and could interfere with airplanes and other communication services, should I keep laughing or should I laugh harder?
Thats my 2 cents (enough loss from me to report it to the FBI)
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This article is not well written, its vastly slanted towards law-breakers.
Neither is your comment. It's vastly slanted towards self-righteous reactionism.
Exhibit #1:
For the record, uncapping ( hacking your modem in order to gain access to untapped bandwidth) is not legal.
Not legal? It's called ILLEGAL. Uncapping your modem is ILLEGAL. "Not legal" is trying to cover it up.
No, the proper term for a breach of contract is not legal. There are laws about breaching contracts, true, but the offense is civil. Not criminal.
Exhibit #2:
As such, their control over the political system in the area is considerable
No examples, no proof, just innuendo and slander.
Since when is an observation in a column that's non-inflammatory and obviously editorial in nature slander? Get a dictionary and look up the word, man. It doesn't mean what you wish it did.
Exhibit #3:
a fact that may under-ride the horrifying journey several individuals are taking through the area's legal gauntlet because they uncapped their cable modems.
More speculation and innuendo. "Legal gauntlet" - what they are the victims now? Oppressed? They broke the law and must now fact the music.
Again, this is independent observation in an editorial piece. Even if it were not, observation that slants the facts to fit one's argument isn't merely "speculation." Do you have some sort of agenda against the poster? THAT's speculation. Moreover, excessive use of force can constitute oppression, and I suggest you read the article more closely instead of replying in a fit of anger.
Exhibit #4:
discovered that twenty three of his subscribers were getting more juice from their connections than they paid for.
Getting more juice. What a joke. They were stealing bandwidth from other customers. And not paying for it.
Bandwidth may be a finite resource, but the company in question has failed to demonstrate a consistent record of customer complaints; that other customers were injured is, actually, speculation on your part. Uncapping doesn't necessarily affect people if you do it at 2AM (not that I'm supporting the act, just raising a point.) They have also failed to demonstrate or prove that the uncapped modems were stealing significant amounts of bandwidth--anyone with half a brain can see that their numbers are massively inflated--and thus the author is raising a valid question: Why haven't we seen proof of this "gravely injurious act" that would make this proverbial boulder necessary to crush the ants?
Exhibit #5:
According to an interview in a recent Cable World article, Shyrock noted that one subscriber had "altered his modem to handle 100 megabits per second, up and downstream", though the company could never realistically even obtain such speeds.
So the fact that there wasn't enough bandwidth makes this better? Okay? They basically modded it to use as much bandwidth as possible, to the detriment of others.
Yes, it does. The damages that the company quoted to the FBI cannot have possibly been true. The fact that the company is quoting similarly heavy figures to a journalistic source is not surprising, but it also shows a basic lack of technical understanding. Again, here, you're also speculating that customers were injured, which they haven't shown happened.
Instead of disconnecting service for uncapping (as is the case with nearly every provider in the U.S.)
Its obviously working very well!
Wonderful. I'll refer you to the hundreds of other analogies that other posters have submitted, because they're all very excellent. It's becoming rapidly obvious that you missed the point of the article in your misguided attempt to appear on a moral high ground.
companies before his life was turned upside-down
Passive voice. He's just a victim! Its not his fault! All his neighbors say he's a great guy!
A Slashdot poster who questions the article's use of grammar, yet can't seem to grasp the proper use of commas himself. Grow up.
The worst that could happen to him, he figured, was that his ISP got angry and disconnected his service. He couldn't have been more wrong.
Bummer. It was just a little mistake. No problem!
That's the worst that SHOULD happen to him -- if not a fine and a settlement of some sorts. Calling in the FBI to settle one's outstanding payments on a civil case is nothing short of ludicrous.
This article can be summed as: "No fair! We weren't expecting to get caught!"
No, not really. But the summation of your comment would seem to be a giant mass of logical fallacies and emotional arguments.
Lets be real people. You can't steal bandwidth. If you modify your equipment to take more bandwidth than you are intended to have by your provider, you may end up in trouble. It doesn't look any of these people are going to jail. They got indicted, have to go to an "aversion" program, and pay some fines. The equipment - that which isn't illegal modified or containing illegal materials - will be returned. If they aren't the defendents should get lawyers.
Ah, so you did miss the point of the article. No one questions that what the users did was wrong; they're simply questioning the company's actions, and its motives.
The reprecussions suffered by the criminals is what happens when you break the law and get caught. Bummer. Don't break the law, or if you have a problem with it get it changed. Each defendent consciously knew what they were doing was wrong, and one even admits that he gambled that the consequences would be minor. Friggin' bummer. You gamble long enough and you will lose.
Keep posting long enough, and I'm sure you'll eventually write a coherent argument. What are you trying to do here -- say the same thing three times over?
got standards? --- http://www.w3.org/
FBI agents don't do anything without their guns. My dad retired from law enforcement 30 years ago and he still takes his gun with him to the bathroom...
If they came in at all, they came in with guns.
" Yes, but from that point they have a short period of time to bring you to a judge where they must convince him why they want to keep you."
I'm certain that's a comforting thought to Jose Padilla who's been imprisoned since May without a trial, access to a lawyer, a telephone call, or one moment without bright lights shining down on him. Yes, the man has to learn how to sleep with the lights on in his tiny cell in a military brig. Anyone who's read 1984 will recognize the rooms with the brights always on with no windows as belonging to the Ministry of Love. I've got news for you; our rights have been eroding for some time, and Sept 11 gave the resident president all the power he needed to bring about a landslide. I hope to God there's a major backlash and soon, or there won't be much left of this country for our children. They'll have to read about it in books, so long as the books they're reading don't make the government suspicious. Perhaps my children will one day turn me in to the FBI for being unamerican.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
IF their property is confiscated as an effect of being convicted of committing some crime in fair trial - it's OK.
If it's taken without that, it's theft or robbery.
The moon is not fully subjugated. I demand a second assault wave preceded by a massive nuclear bombardment.
I watched a two-part series about some very disturbing developments in the US police and justice system. They are availible online and although it's a Dutch program almost everything is spoken English so it's worth to watch for non-Dutchies
Realplayer stream part 1:
http://info.vpro.nl/rmstreams.db?7273010
Realplayer stream part 2:
http://info.vpro.nl/rmstreams.db?7273012
Repeat after me: We are all individuals
On another note, I always read that the Iran-Contra affair was about selling *weapons*, not drugs.
It was about selling drugs to get the money to buy the guns to trade to the Iranians for the return of our hostages. It was illegal to give Iran military weapons. Any government department that has any legal money whatsoever gets that money from Congress since that is one of the major roles of Congress. So since they were not authorized to give weapons to those countries, they had to come up with another source of income. So they imported and sold large amounts of cocaine to fund their illegal operation. This, in a nutshell, is what happened.