Comcast Still Fighting FCC Throttling Sanction - Insists FCC didn't have authority to act
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Comcast Still Fighting FCC Throttling Sanction
Insists FCC didn't have authority to act
03:27PM Tuesday Oct 27 2009 by Karl Bode
tags: legal · business · bandwidth · cable · networking · net-neutrality · caps · Comcast
A little more than a year ago, Comcast got their wrist slapped by the FCC for throttling upstream P2P traffic (and lying about it to the press and consumers), though the "sanction" contained no substantive punishment or fine. Still, Comcast has been battling the ruling ever since, arguing that the FCC's neutrality principles (pdf) don't give the FCC the authority to investigate the issue, much less sanction the company. In a final filing (pdf) provided to Broadband Reports by Comcast, the carrier argues that the FCC also violated "basic rules of fair notice:"
As shown in Comcast's opening brief, the Order is unlawful because it enforced mere policy - not any provision of federal law - against Comcast. In addition to this fatal flaw, the Commission's action was procedurally improper and violated bedrock principles of fair notice.
Of course the debate over whether the FCC has the authority to enforce neutrality principles is a major reason why the FCC is taking steps to expand those rules, so there's little doubt they have the authority to act when carriers engage in particularly heavy-handed neutrality violations. Comcast however still wants the original FCC ruling overturned. Final joint briefs are due in the case between Comcast and the FCC November 23, but Comcast tells us their final document should essentially mirror this one.

As you might expect, the FCC's own filing doesn't see things quite the same way. The agency argues that their "determinations were lawful and reasonable," and that the agency was well within its mandate. "Congress created the FCC for cases such as this one," the agency says.

Related:
  1. Comcast Sued For Traffic Shaping
  2. NY Attorney General Investigating Comcast
  3. Verizon Laughs Off DOCSIS 3.0
  4. Time Warner Cable: Let's Not Talk About Net Neutrality
  5. Cable Cooking Up New Network Management System
  6. Comcast Fighting FCC Throttling Ruling
  7. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
  8. Cox Scraps App-Specific Throttling Trials
Links: New Topic
Forums »

Pv8man @ 27th Oct 03:36PM:
Comcast

Comcast - "We should be able to block any traffic we want because we own the internet, not to mention all the kickbacks we will get from the entertainment industry for blocking certain p2p apps"
reply
Mike_ @ 27th Oct 03:38PM:
Its history now.

Whats done is done.. Comcast : you were in the wrong regardless of "fair notice". Get over it.
--
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Unless you know what you're doing.
reply
thevorpal @ 27th Oct 04:00PM:
Very odd behavior

It seems odd to me that they would continue to fight this. The sanction had no teeth, they could be on their way.

Of course, I do get that they are trying to fight precedent, but claiming that the FCC's doesn't have that authority is probably a risky thing to do when the FCC is in the process of defining what sort of authority it means to exert.

I can just see the FCC stating, "OH yeah, we forgot about that, thanks for reminding us we will make sure that one gets in".

(Personally I'd like to see them establish common carrier requirements and be done with it)
reply
rit56 @ 27th Oct 04:40PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

They're trying to set a precedent. They know if the FCC lets them get a pass on this after the ruling against them then they will be able to do what they please and thumb their noses. They will never adhere to anything. Your move FCC and you better make it good.
reply
NetFixer @ 27th Oct 04:41PM:
Fair Notice

Comcast and "basic rules of fair notice" complaint against the FCC.


[att=1]

Mr. Pot, please allow me to introduce you to Ms. Kettle.

--
History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
-- Thomas Jefferson
reply
zalternate @ 27th Oct 04:44PM:
Throttling?

What throttling?

This case had to do with 'Hacking' the users connections to send false packets to stop the file transfers.

Shouldn't this have been a 3 year country club jail sentence for the Comcast boss's responsible for the hacking?
--
Consumer Rights is more than just a suggestion.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 04:45PM:
Re: Comcast

they own the last mile of the network they created. so yes they do own what you view. You only lease that last mile of the network and pay for the network. They provide the internet as an addon.
reply
Eat Me @ 27th Oct 04:46PM:
Re: Comcast

said by hottboiinnc :

they own the last mile of the network they created. so yes they do own what you view. You only lease that last mile of the network and pay for the network. They provide the internet as an addon.
Time to break up comcast. They are way too big.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 04:46PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

And the FCC and try and do all they want. Comcast will keep going to court over it. The FCC doesn't really have any control over the Internet, and Comcast knows this.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 04:47PM:
Re: Comcast

And the same should happen to: AT$T and VZ. But will never happen.

When Comcast is broken up ATT and VZ better be split right along with them. But when everyone's prices go up, you can thank the courts for that one as well.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 04:48PM:
Re: Throttling?

they didn't "hack" they simply disrupted their OWN Network for working the correct way. You forget, YOUR ISP OWNS the last mile of network. That is ONLY connected to the Internet and IS NOT the internet. You get the Internet as an add-on bonus.
reply
gorehound @ 27th Oct 04:51PM:
Re: Comcast

fuck off comcast and all the other ISP who think they can cap you or block content or slow content.
one of these days your company will go down and no one will care.
reply
mod_wastrel @ 27th Oct 05:04PM:
Re: Comcast

Their customers pay Comcast to deliver their bytes. To intentionally do anything else--such as packet forgery (falsely in the name of "network management")--constitutes contractual fraud. Customers pay for "Internet access", not access to the "Comcast network".

"...internet as an addon." = too funny.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 05:29PM:
Re: Comcast

It is an add-on. They own the network and lease that not the Internet.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 05:30PM:
Re: Comcast

And you'll do what? complain to ATT? VZ? TWC?

Nobody will care about you. the Internet will be capped and you'll like it or do without.
reply
navalpatel @ 27th Oct 05:52PM:
Re: Its history now.

Perhaps we should go ahead and toss out due process all together?

Comcast does have a valid argument on this one.
reply
Skippy25 @ 27th Oct 05:55PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

Sure they do. They made that clear already which got Comcast to stop to begin with.

They also make that clear when they layout the "principles" of broadband and net neutrality. They may not have teeth right now, but they certainly do dictate those things.

I agree with you one of your above statements though, at least partially as I would say they need to force all current providers to decide right here and right now: Are you a dumbpipe or a content provider? Pick one, because you can't be both.
reply
Skippy25 @ 27th Oct 06:06PM:
Re: Throttling?

You are such a comcastie.

I will agree they own the last mile, but the packets they don't own and if I am not mistaken this has been determined in courts already. So no they did not "disrupt their OWN Network", they disrupted the user's packets and communications with a service outside of comcast.

They have no more of a right to modify your P2P packets "for network management" than they do for your email messages or your youtube video that is streaming. Comcast does NOT get to determine who's packets are more important and who's packets dont get to be delivered at all.

Are you going to tell me that FedEx owns the computer systems I ship with them because it is their transport I am using? The same concept applies here. They are the user's packets and they are simply sending them across Comcast's transport which they purchased the right to do.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:25PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

They will pick both.

The FCC does not have any control over the Internet DUE to it NOT being regulated. As soon as the FCC steps in and decides they have control the Internet will be taxed. That's something that has been blocked for many many years now.

The courts will tell the FCC they don't have control over it as well. Just like the FCC tried to tell cable companies they have a cap but if you deployed IPTV you didn't have a cap because the Telco's argued it's not "cable tv". The courts see it as "cable tv".

The thing comes down to it though, the network is owned and operated by the cable or telco or the ISP. They are NOT the Internet and only provide access to it. They can easily go back to the Walled Garden and become AOL all over again if the Net Neutrality BS passes and becomes law. But the fact is it has to become law first. And the FCC DOES NOT create laws. They only create Rules which the court's do not like.

Everyone that may be in favor of Net Netural is gonna have a nice surprise if it happens. Walled Gardens will come back and AOL will be the ISP everyone gets stuck with.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:29PM:
Re: Throttling?

Actually with FedEx, YES, they own that product once it is in their truck. The same as the USPS OWNS the item you are mailing. Go Read the TOS/AUP that FedEx and UPS has when you ship with them. Same rules apply.

And no, as far as being in favor of Comcast (by the way never had them in my life), they own what goes over that network, once it HITS THEIR NETWORK.

They can turn your connection into a Walled Garden in under 2 seconds if they wanted to and you'd be SOLed. Why? They provide the NETWORK's LAST MILE, and GIVE YOU access to the Internet. They say you can access it if THEY ALLOW you. IF you don't like what they have to say, then DO NOT USE THEM. The same applies to USPS vs FedEx and UPS. IF you don't like the way the USPS handles its product, you do like i did, go to UPS and let them mail everything. May cost more but at least you know it gets there and when. You also don't have to worry about prices going up every year and having to deal with their asshol* employees.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 06:41PM:
Re: Comcast

Nope. That's like saying the post office owns your mail because they deliver it to you. Silliness.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 06:43PM:
Re: Throttling?

Nope. The point of being on the network and paying for the service is to get ON the internet, not Comcast's network.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 06:46PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

A walled garden is not going to get any of these companies business. Interesting thoughts on the rest of your post.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:46PM:
Re: Comcast

they do. once it enters their system it is there's until the addressee OPENS it.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:48PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

a WG may not get them any business but what happens when they're the only company to turn to? The same as AOL when it first came out? Their garden WAS the Internet. You either partnered with them or didn't get any customers/visitors.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 06:48PM:
Re: Throttling?

Very strange view of how this situation works. You have to look at intent of service. The point is NOT to be on Comcast's network. It's to be on the INTERNET. Comcast is just a transport to the internet. We see things VERY differently.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 06:50PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

The point is that they won't have any customers with that approach. That ship has sailed with Earthlink, AOL, Compuserve, and the other networks. The internet is where it's at. No business will be able to put that genie back in the bottle...
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:52PM:
Re: Throttling?

True, but Comcast and the rest of the ISPs do not see it that way NOR was it meant to be that way. It was meant to deliver their products TO YOU in a high speed fashion.

That is why the ISP should NOT be the company that owns the network (ie: @Home days with both Comcast, ATTB, Cox, Rogers, CableVision, etc).

But that will never happen again due to the fall out that @home suffered. So what happens is the Walled Garden comes back into play after AOL becomes the official ISP of every Last Mile owner.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:54PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

AOL still has their software and still makes it. It's free to use with any connection you have as long as you bring you own connection.

You have a point, but when your only option is the WG or not what are you going to do? You can recreate everything. And the thing that the cable/telco's see is that they maybe the only option for many many people. People will use it and thats the thing.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 27th Oct 06:56PM:
Re: Throttling?

Yes, but see, you admit that you use Comcast's network. There for they decide what you can and not use THEIR network for. You only pay to USE THEIR Network. They don't say anywhere in any document that you get access to the full internet NOR do they have to give it to you. You pay for access to the NETWORK.
reply
mod_wastrel @ 27th Oct 07:05PM:
Re: Comcast

Which part of "Internet Service Provider" is it that you fail to grasp? (apparently all of it)
reply
Michael C @ 27th Oct 07:47PM:
Re: Comcast

I pay for Internet SERVICE. I don't own/lease the wire. I don't own/lease the network, and frankly I don't care what they do with their hardware or network as long as it doesn't interfere with my Internet SERVICE. The point your missing is who gets to define what the "Internet" is? Because if ISP get to block, throttle, or otherwise alter my connection on any level OTHER than a total slowdown or shutoff of my connection, then I'm not getting the same "Internet" as everyone else. When I order Internet Service from an ISP, I have the assumption that I'm getting the same Internet as everyone else at whatever speed and conditions I agree to with my ISP.

What the FCC is doing is actually helping to uphold the definition of the "Internet" so that when you purchase "Internet" service from an ISP, you know what you're getting.
reply
SuperWISP @ 27th Oct 08:08PM:
It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

Regulatory agencies often overreach, as the FCC did in the Janet Jackson kerfluffle. Kevin Martin wanted to take a swipe at the cable companies so as to get in good with the Bells (for whom he now works as a very highly paid attorney), so he prodded the FCC to exceed its legal authority and deliver a firm slap to Comcast. Alas, because his ruling would set a terrible precedent and allow the camel's nose of regulation into the Internet tent, it had to be challenged. Bully for Comcast! The court will define the limits of the FCC's jurisdiction, and we'll all be the better for it.
reply
bender @ 27th Oct 08:31PM:
Re: Throttling?

i'm sorry but the ip that comcast gives its customers does not belong to comcast. they have persmission to use it. big difference. personally i wish that iana would step up with some rules for ISPs.
reply
bender @ 27th Oct 08:35PM:
Re: Throttling?

are you brian roberts? ceo of comcast?
reply
bender @ 27th Oct 08:36PM:
Re: Throttling?

the isp only transports my information. in no way do they have any right to look at or analyze it.
reply
bender @ 27th Oct 08:41PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

i vote for dumb pipe. instead of slowing down or otherwise tampering with customers internet connections they should be expanding their network to handle the demand.
reply
Pv8man @ 27th Oct 08:41PM:
Re: Comcast

Really "hitboiinnc" ?
"the Internet will be capped and you'll like it or do without."

I guess someone owns stock in Comcast, huh?
reply
chronoss2009 @ 27th Oct 09:09PM:
the landlord tenant act of canada

when i rent a room its legally MINE to do as i want. in effect it isn't comcasts its mine as i'm rent my piece of that mile

imagine if you apply all this non sense to driving cars and living in your house

YOU cant watch tv nor do anyhting you want when you are awake
and only can occupy 5% of your room for 14 hrs of the day ( BCE bell Canada style)

car wise when you want to drive to and from work your only allowed to go 5 miles an hour and you cant have passengers that aren't approved by the manufacturer , you cant drive after dark or have music or anything not approved nor modify said car.

YEA go over real well in the real world and that effect would destroy whats left of actual capitalism and as such these types a actions are NOT CAPITALISM. THEY HINDER IT.
reply
Pv8man @ 27th Oct 09:31PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

I 2nd that.

No interference of peoples packets...unless they are malicious packets that are designed to do intentional harm to the network.

They will still be PLENTY profitable without the ability to slowly rape their customers to please their stock holders.

usual opposition's response -

"but comcast paid for their network to be built, and if you don't like it, you can build your own ISP or change providers"

My response to that response -

"Yeah that would be good and fine if the existing powerful ISP's didn't lobby against any small independent ISP's from growing, thus preventing TRUE free market capitalism by committing a variety of Anti-Competitive things,

Or AT&T for controlling the rates of bandwidth by overestimating the true cost of the bandwidth.

There are a lot of factors to include.
reply
bender @ 27th Oct 09:37PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

thing is, the ISP never is the one to pay for the network. in the end they just pass that cost on to the customers.
reply
sonicmerlin @ 27th Oct 10:29PM:
Re: Comcast

Uh...if I recall correctly history has shown the breakup of giant corporations who have natural monopolies or duopolies leads to greater innovation and lower prices.

So what are you talking about?
reply
sonicmerlin @ 27th Oct 10:32PM:
Re: Very odd behavior

God you`re such a troll. You know absolutely nothing about how the internet business works. Why don`t you just stop talking already.
reply
sonicmerlin @ 27th Oct 10:34PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

Time for your medication super.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 10:37PM:
Re: Throttling?

Wrong.
reply
jjeffeory @ 27th Oct 10:38PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

Good comments. I agree, regulatory agencies do often overreach. I can agree on that point.
reply
kustomjs @ 27th Oct 11:57PM:
cable wount last much longer anyways.

I would say cable wount last much longer anyways because all these telco's are starting to ramp up IPTV on there networks. Plus comcast is greedy anyways they want you pay big $$$ for there crappy services.
reply
Z80 @ 28th Oct 12:08AM:
Re: Comcast

That they created...

...and is regulated on multiple levels including antitrust laws that prevent Comcast from using their market position to hamper video competitors.
reply
Z80 @ 28th Oct 12:10AM:
Re: Comcast

Yeah, because we know that less competition and market consolidation leads to lower prices. :uhh:
reply
hobgoblin @ 28th Oct 12:36AM:
Re: cable wount last much longer anyways.

said by kustomjs :

I would say cable wount last much longer anyways because all these telco's are starting to ramp up IPTV on there networks. Plus comcast is greedy anyways they want you pay big $$$ for there crappy services.
And the telco's are giving it away for free?

Cool.

Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

reply
PittsPgh @ 28th Oct 02:32AM:
Re: Very odd behavior

said by hottboiinnc :

They will pick both.

The FCC does not have any control over the Internet DUE to it NOT being regulated. As soon as the FCC steps in and decides they have control the Internet will be taxed. That's something that has been blocked for many many years now.

The courts will tell the FCC they don't have control over it as well. Just like the FCC tried to tell cable companies they have a cap but if you deployed IPTV you didn't have a cap because the Telco's argued it's not "cable tv". The courts see it as "cable tv".

The thing comes down to it though, the network is owned and operated by the cable or telco or the ISP. They are NOT the Internet and only provide access to it. They can easily go back to the Walled Garden and become AOL all over again if the Net Neutrality BS passes and becomes law. But the fact is it has to become law first. And the FCC DOES NOT create laws. They only create Rules which the court's do not like.

Everyone that may be in favor of Net Netural is gonna have a nice surprise if it happens. Walled Gardens will come back and AOL will be the ISP everyone gets stuck with.
LMFAO!!! It's too late!! The Internet is out of the Bag!! And it ain't going back in!!
I know Camost can do some stupid crap. But I highly doubt they'll be doing a Walled Garden setup any time soon.

Now you, You just stay in your little ole AOL Garden and leave the real internet to those of us that know how to make use of it, and do.

My bill says I pay for Internet, Not Comcast Network. I am paying for access to the internet. Be it through Comcast's network or however's network. FYI ISP = Internet Service Provider. That who Comcast is. Not a WGP = Walled Garden Provider

If it take some FCC Mandated Regulated Law to keep the internet free and unfettered access. So be it! That's what Comcast and AT&T and the likes are afraid of. Remember not even 2 (maybe only a year) years ago, AT&T I belive wanted to charge companies such as Google to allow access over thier network to thier users?? That's when all this talk of Net Nuetrality started to come about. Besides when Comcast was lieing about forging packets.
If it wasn't for the openess of the internet. Tons of companies would never even exist today.
Paul

Maybe if the banking and finace world had still been regulated we wouldn't be in the mess it's in today.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:49AM:
Re: Comcast

Look at ATT or VZ prices and their price hikes? i don't see that as lower prices. We also didn't see xDSL until Covad and others started to offer it.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:49AM:
Re: Comcast

They do not call them selves that. They provide it as a part of the network access.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:51AM:
Re: Comcast

YOU PAY FOR ACCESS TO THEIR NETWORK. THE SAME AS WHEN YOU PAY FOR CABLE TV. YOU PAY FOR THE CHANNELS THEY OFFER YOU AND NOTHING MORE.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:51AM:
Re: Comcast

Nope. But the FCC doesn't have any control over the Internet and the Courts will see it that way.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:52AM:
Re: Very odd behavior

The same about you. You do the same with ATT.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:54AM:
Re: Very odd behavior

Comcast and ATT control the Internet and the backbone that it uses. They also control everything from their network to YOUR HOUSE. Use what they provide or don't use anything.

ATT will get what they want and so will Comcast. ATT can just stop giving the DHS access to the wholesale network for blocking their moves, and they too would sue the same as Comcast is doing.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:55AM:
Re: the landlord tenant act of canada

that doesn't apply to the Network that CC provides.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:55AM:
Re: cable wount last much longer anyways.

and they're going to run it to the farms 20+ miles from the CO.
reply
hottboiinnc @ 28th Oct 10:56AM:
Re: Throttling?

They do. Take a look at the ATT/Yahoo AUP/TOS that has been upheld in court. ATT has the right to view it and THEY OWN it.
reply
bender @ 28th Oct 11:01AM:
Re: Throttling?

dude fine. in your logic if i were to say share the entire collection of michael jacksons greatest hits on a comcast connection then comcast is responsible for the fact that it is shared and actually transmitting to other people.
reply
Necronomikro @ 28th Oct 11:06AM:
Re: Comcast

said by hottboiinnc :

They do not call them selves that. They provide it as a part of the network access.
And you get exactly what from Comcast's network? I don't even think you can load their homepage without loading external data.
reply
mod_wastrel @ 28th Oct 11:16AM:
Re: Comcast

Comcast HSI => High-Speed Internet

(Bored now.)
reply
PittsPgh @ 28th Oct 11:36AM:
Re: Comcast

said by Pv8man :

Really "hitboiinnc" ?
"the Internet will be capped and you'll like it or do without."

I guess someone owns stock in Comcast, huh?
Well he better sell it all off now, before Comcast goes to the "Walled Garden" he keeps talking about in another thread here.

Paul
reply
Skippy25 @ 28th Oct 11:38AM:
Re: Very odd behavior

I am going to have to agree with sonicmerlin on this one.

Beyond that you are in this fantasy world if you think Comcast and AT&T can suddenly take their ball and go home.

They can't and if they even tried the regulation bodies would be so far up their asses you wouldn't know where they began and the government ended.

AT&T and Comcast own a majority of the last mile in their territories, they do not own a majority of the core internet. They cannot control or dictate the internet and they know this which is why they are fighting so hard to not officially become the dumbpipes they truly are.
reply
Skippy25 @ 28th Oct 11:53AM:
Re: Throttling?

Im going to guess you are just making up the FedEx/UPS rebuttal without yourself doing any reading as I just reviewed the 49 page TOS of UPS and it does not state in a single place that ownership of property is shifted to them while it is in transport. Nice try though.

Again, they do not own a single packet that goes over the internet. You seriously need to stop just making stuff up. It is making you look even more like a troll.

Your dumb wall garden threat has been rebutted in other places so I wont do it again here.
reply
SuperWISP @ 28th Oct 06:42PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

said by bender :

i vote for dumb pipe.
Our ISP offers "dumb pipes." But they necessarily cost more per megabit per second than "smart pipes," because they cost us more to provide. You are always free to vote with your wallet with regard to what kind of service you would like, but there is no free lunch.
reply
bender @ 28th Oct 06:47PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

please don't use cliche's they are so f*ing tacky. plus that made no sense.

are you referring to "business class" service?
reply
SuperWISP @ 31st Oct 12:28PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

said by bender :

please don't use cliche's they are so f*ing tacky. plus that made no sense.
Oh, you mean like, "dumb pipe?" Or "end-to-end?"
reply
crese24 @ 31st Oct 09:58PM:
Throttling is very bad.

I think the internet can and will run just fine without comcast throttling it. Throttling is very bad.
reply
crese24 @ 31st Oct 10:03PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

It would be better if the network could actually handle what people want to use it for, instead of the network being throttled to un-usable speeds.
reply
crese24 @ 31st Oct 10:17PM:
Re: Throttling?

They were throttling the upstream of bitorrent packets therefore slowing down: the download side, as well as the upload side. By doing this, transfers took longer to complete.
reply
bender @ 1st Nov 06:27PM:
Re: It is good that Comcast is challenging the FCC.

said by SuperWISP :

said by bender :

please don't use cliche's they are so f*ing tacky. plus that made no sense.
Oh, you mean like, "dumb pipe?" Or "end-to-end?"
dump pipe isn't a cliche. its exactly what they need to be. provide internet access and don't try any funny business with my packets.
reply
EGeezer @ 9th Nov 11:17PM:
Re: Comcast

said by hottboiinnc :

they do. once it enters their system it is there's until the addressee OPENS it.
But it doesn't give the post office the right to take stuff out of the envelope, put stuff in it or toss it in a bin to delay it for a few days because they felt the sender was sending too many letters..
--
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis
reply

Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2009 silver matrix LLC