Formally defends its controversial interference of P2P traffic in testimony before the FCC.
Comcast testified before the FCC in formal comments Tuesday that hampering some file-sharing traffic by its customers was a justifiable way to keep network traffic flowing for everyone.
The company’s network management practices that cause a disruption in BitTorrent traffic is the subject of formal complaints to the FCC from consumer groups and law professors.
Both argue that Comcast is violating the principle of ‘Net Neutrality, that all Internet traffic should be treated equally regardless of consumption levels. They say the company has ulterior motives in hindering the downloading of video content since the practice competes with its very own cable TV business.
I think this latter argument is the best one being that it’s been apparent to everyone for years now that a decent broadband connection can deliver you all the movies and TV shows you’ll ever want to watch. Cable TV’s model of making viewers subject to the whims of network program schedules will make it increasingly irrelevant with an Internet TV world that never sleeps.
Comcast says it must curb some file-sharing traffic because some subscribers hog bandwidth that could be otherwise available to others. But, who do they expect to purchase the faster packages that advertise 1MB/s DL speeds?
It also defended the way that it throttles BitTorrent traffic by using "reset" packets to break off communications between two PCs. Comcast sometimes inserts these packets in the data stream to kill a file-sharing session. The move "fools" each computer into believing the other computer wants to end the connection.
In their complaint with the FCC, advocacy groups Free Press and Public Knowledge said Comcast was "forging" the return addresses of the reset packets. File-sharing programs generally try to re-establish a connection after receiving a reset packet, and Comcast may let subsequent attempts through. More likely, though, the computer that is requesting a file goes elsewhere on the Internet to find it.
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is supportive of network management, but has said providers like Comcast should be open about their practices. What the FCC will be an important test of how far ISPs are allowed to go in managing their networks. The main argument against it is that it sets a precedence in which an ISP is allowed to favor some traffic over others, thereby setting the stage for it to discriminate further by type, size, etc…
Related Posts
- FCC Gives Comcast 30 Days to Comply with Penalties for Throttling BitTorrent
- Comcast to Throttle Heavy Internet Users Up to 20 Min
- Comcast Reveals How it Throttled BitTorrent
- Comcast Quits Throttling BitTorrent, Targets Heavy Users Instead
- AT&T to FCC: ‘We Don’t Throttle BitTorrent’
Loading ...
fcc to comcast stop throttling p2p traffic or face the loss of dmca immunity/impunity or even worse fines for discrimination.
Well I’ll say this. Cocmast is *NOT* afarid of bittorrent competing with their TV service. I have sold comcast for almost a year now and I think I’ve heard every excuse possible not to buy the television service of the thousands of people I’ve talked to I’ve never once heard the excuse that bittorrent took the place of their television service. Comcast jacks up the prices anyway for customers who get their internet service and not TV service so either way they win really.
No I think Comcast is just thinking that the less bandwidth is being sucked into bittorrent the less money they have to spend buying the bandwidth. The other thing is that they can advertise having faster connections because they are really trying to compete with FIOS in some areas.
Its just funny that they want to advertise faster speeds but in the end if their service is blocking file sharing their isn’t much use for those speeds. That is unless you are running a internet business or playing games online.
true that is pretty ridiculous but like I’ve said in other articles if these internet providers think they can jack around with people they are just opening the doors for true wireless ISPs like AT&T Sprint and Verizon to gain market share if not their direct competitors like FIOS.
The same thing that is happening with landlines will happen to ISPSs just a matter of time.
Why are you people praising Verizon and their FIOS? Doesn’t anyone remember that they are going to be going to a pay per byte system? Who cares how fast or better their system is when you are going to have to pay outrageous fees to use it?