Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comcast Sued Again over P2P Throttling

Posted by Soulskill on from the facing-a-torrent-of-legal-actions dept.

Dr. Eggman writes "Ars Technica brings us news of a disgruntled Washington D.C. Comcast customer who has filed a lawsuit against Comcast over claims of false advertising. The complaint seeks punitive damages, class-action status, and attorneys' fees. The customer claims Comcast advertised 'unfettered access to all the content, services, and applications that the Internet has to offer.' We discussed a similar lawsuit brought against Comcast by a Californian customer back in November, as well as the FCC investigation into Comcast's practices. While Comcast confirmed reception of the new lawsuit, they declined to comment on it directly. Spokesman Charlie Douglas was quoted saying, 'To be clear, Comcast does not, has not, and will not block any Web sites or online applications, including peer-to-peer services, and no one has demonstrated otherwise.'"

3 of 73 comments (clear)

  1. Alternate reality. by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comcast does not, has not, and will not block any Web sites or online applications, including peer-to-peer services, and no one has demonstrated otherwise. Of course they don't block anyone's traffic. Why would anyone dare claim they would stoop to such low measures? Why, they're Comcastic!
    --
    512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
  2. Haha, good luck. by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're arguing with Comcast about the words they used to describe their service? Do you know how that works in the UK?

    Unlimited 1. not limited; unrestricted; unconfined: unlimited trade.
    2. boundless; infinite; vast: the unlimited skies.
    3. without any qualification or exception; unconditional.

    4. (ISP Def. only) Confined within limits; restricted or circumscribed: a limited space; limited resources.)

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  3. Re:Better idea by TheCRAIGGERS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't tell if this is flamebait or not, so I'll be good and reply instead of modding.

    As long as it's over 0%, the percentage doesn't matter. The point is, they're supposed to be a common carrier and route the damn packets. Customers and services that customers pay to use rely on ISPs adhering to standards. And please, don't make Comcast out to be some great defender of the Copyright. They're only doing this to save their stockholders money- nothing more.

    Besides, piracy existed (and still does) well before the Torrent protocol. HTTP, IRC, SMTP, and FTP are all still used to transfer files in violation of copyright. Should Comcast throttle these indiscriminately as well? Where do you draw the line?