Slashdot Mirror
FCC Considers Taking Action Against Comcast
Presto Vivace writes "According to CNet the Federal Communications Commission is considering taking action against cable operator Comcast modifying peer-to-peer traffic, a subject we've discussed here in the past. 'It looks like Chairman Martin, and by extension the commission, sees Comcast as going beyond simply managing its network. But even if the FCC decides that Comcast has violated Net neutrality principles, it's unclear what the agency can actually do to Comcast. The principles are not agency regulation.'"
When big business (or advocacy groups) can abuse consumers and no one intervenes until there is a problem (even when it is illegal, or wrong), and there is NO punishment for doing so ... why would they conform?
Answering the question "what can the FCC do": I would assume that they could take their license away, as the final threat.
I don't think the Comcast situation has much to do with net neutrality. Lack of "net neutrality" would mean that a service provider slows down some traffic and not other traffic. So your bittorrent might take 12 hours instead of 1, but work without problems. But that is not what Comcast does: They actively manipulate the traffic that goes through their system, sending fake abort messages to bittorrent clients. That, I think, could be very much in violation of whatever license they need.
If I sent you a letter and it arrived in five days instead of one day, I would complain. If the post office deliberately threw away my letters, I would complain a lot louder.
I guess the check cleared.
While I am hopeful that the FCC does act, I have about 0 faith in Kevin Martin.
Kevin Martin was an aide to Bush/Cheney in the 2000 election, he worked the Florida recount, he was coat tailed in as an aide in the transition from Clinton, was appointed to an advisory position once Bush took office, his wife was given a job as one of Cheney's aides, and since late 2007 he has been under investigation by Congress for abuse of power, and working to reduce the effective power of the FCC.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
As long as they don't flash a nipple on TV, the FCC won't do anything. It's like Ed Meese or John Ashcroft work there.
More music, fewer hits
Excerpt from ruling......
Bad Comcast, Bad Comcast, Bad.
We're sorry we had to be so harsh.
The prior FCC's head. He said once, to the news, and I quote "I literally have no idea what the public interest is." unquote.
That pretty much sums up the FCC. So don't hold your breath, the FCC is there to mouth words that the the religious right wants to hear and to support the oligopolies that keep American telcom mired 10-15 years in the past.
I am a comcast customer (fortunately or unfortunately, take your pick). On the island where I live they are the only broadband internet provider. I haven't had any problems with speed or connectivity when using torrents and I will admit that while I do leave several legal torrents open at night and on the weekends there are those that are not so legal from time to time. I routinely can grab a CD's worth of data in an hour or two without any problems. Last night before going to bed I queued up over 4 GB worth of downloads and they were all finished by the time I got up 6 hours later.
/.'ers?
I haven't experienced any of this slow down or even ask other comments have suggested the "end packets" or whatever that mess up my downloads. Perhaps it happens to be the fact that I live in a smaller metropolitan area that the rest of the
But in any case, what should I look for to see if it is happening to me? I admit I haven't had much interest in digging deeper since it doesn't seem to be happening for me, but would like to delve deeper if the signs of traffic shaping are more subtle.
FCC will issue a written warning to comcast to stop such practices, slap a $500 fine and close the file.
Comcast will continue to stop Bit Torrent until it can find a way to make money off it.
FCC's Martin will resign in Jan 2009 and join Comcast.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
The way Comcast's system works is, when Alice communicates with Bob, sending forged packets that impersonate Alice saying, "Bob, never mind - cancel the connection."
If I'm Alice, the Comcast customer, I would find it fraudulent to see a company sending forged packages as me. Why should it be hard to punish Comcast for impersonating me and disrupting my communication with someone else?
If Comcast is allowed to send forged IP messages, are they also allowed to forge emails from me that disrupt my communication with those people?
|/usr/games/fortune
Yes! But, unfortunately, their lobbyists got the politicians to give them local monopolies. So, therefore, they won't lose customers unless their customers are willing to do without.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
I haven't experienced any of this slow down or even ask other comments have suggested the "end packets" or whatever that mess up my downloads.
Duduuuude! The FBI is setting you up! Get out!!! Now!
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
But even if the FCC decides that Comcast has violated Net neutrality principles, it's unclear what the agency can actually do to Comcast
If Comcast is messing with the content going over their cables, then they should no longer be allowed common carrier immunity for that content. This makes them liable for every bit of pirated media, kiddy porn, libel and spam sent over those cables.
A few lawsuits ought to wake them up, I'm sure Comcast has pockets deep enough to attract a few contingency lawyers.
-- Alastair
That's like the phone company saying that you talk too much, and in order to slow down your talking they will suddenly and without warning hang up both telephones on the two ends of the conversation for you. Since you have a Redial button, this should only be a minor inconvenience for you at most.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
The FCC is actually going to do something by, for, or of the people? I think every rational constitutionalist in the country just had a collective heart attack. Aren't these the same guys that effectively gave every radio station and television network to these five corporations:
AOL/Time Warner
Viacom
News Corp
Bertellsman
Disney
?
I'll believe it when I see it. Until then I have my rifle loaded and my FM transmitter on high.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Comcast's business model largely depends on making deals with local governments to get a monopoly. Deliberately making their service unreliable, could be viewed as some sort of acting-in-bad-faith breach of contract.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The fact that they can say, "Its our network, we'll screw whoever we please when we please", *is* the problem. If we allowed roads to all be privately owned, we'd likewise be screwed. We need to nationalize the "tubes" ( ;-) hehehe ) and lease bandwidth back to any- and everybody who wants to be an ISP. Can you imagine if the telephone companies decided that too many people were dialing 800 numbers? If they started hanging up 1/2 of the 800 calls, people wouldn't be saying, "Well, they own the phone system, they can cut me off if I dial a number they don't like."