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?
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
The post office deliberately sends a soldier fake dear john letters, merely because they believe that soldier's girlfriend to be unscrupulous, or because they have grown tired of mailing that soldier's letters to his girlfriend.
Other than that minor point, I agree entirely.
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.
Nope, try this example:
Comcast is like a car, er wait, truck, no... HUMMER and you are behind them in traffic, but you drive a Pinto. All you can smell is the diesel exaust from the Hummer. Then the driver of the hummer gets out and kicks you in the face, but there is a dear john letter stuck to his boot, that is now stuck to your face. You can't see where you are going, so you go home, but when you get there your cat is hanging from the celing with a puddle of water on the ground. There is no evidence of struggle, so obvously your cat committed suicide by standing on a large block of ice and slowly hanging itself. You look at your cable modem and the "sync" light is slowly blinking... no internet. Damn! screwed by Comcast again!
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
As a cable provider, they don't. As an internet and phone provider, they do.
It's all about control. Cable companies have control over their content and thus can be held liable for their content. Internet and phone providers, however, do NOT have control over the data that passes over their wires. Thus they cannot be reasonably expected to be held accountable for that data. Unless they demonstrate that they are actively attempting to control the content. Then the legal veil is pierced and the common carrier status is lost.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Then how about this: the phone company decides to disconnect your line because although they advertise that their customers can talk for an unlimited amount of time, they think you're just talking way too much, possibly about something they deem inappropriate. You can call right back and continue talking, but they'll keep periodically disconnecting you. When you complain about this to the phone company, they claim that they aren't stopping you from having your conversation; they're just slowing it down a lot in order to manage the number of phone calls on their lines.
Is that a bit more appropriate to you? It's still grossly unacceptable.