October 23rd, 2007 by schang
After days of silence, Comcast released a statement last night responding to the AP investigative report showing the company blocking or interfering with BitTorrent’s file-sharing traffic — and much more.
To recap, AP conducted its own testing to verify chatter in the blogosphere that Comcast was surreptitiously throttling the peer-to-peer file-sharing network BitTorrent. Further testing by the Electronic Frontier Foundation showed Comcast blocking Gnutella, another file-sharing network, and the business application Lotus Notes.
What Comcast is doing is inspecting the packets of information users send over BitTorrent and similar peer-to-peer protocols. When Comcast’s technology identifies a file being uploaded over BitTorrent, it intercepts and terminates the transmission by falsifying the TCP to look like one of the end users.
As Professor Susan Crawford explains: “It’s as if someone else that sounded like you got on the phone as you were talking to your mother and said, ‘We need to hang up right now.’ ”
Comcast’s behavior, which AP calls “the most drastic example yet of data discrimination by a U.S. Internet service provider,” is what a world without Net Neutrality looks like.
[...]
To recap, AP conducted its own testing to verify chatter in the blogosphere that Comcast was surreptitiously throttling the peer-to-peer file-sharing network BitTorrent. Further testing by the Electronic Frontier Foundation showed Comcast blocking Gnutella, another file-sharing network, and the business application Lotus Notes.
What Comcast is doing is inspecting the packets of information users send over BitTorrent and similar peer-to-peer protocols. When Comcast’s technology identifies a file being uploaded over BitTorrent, it intercepts and terminates the transmission by falsifying the TCP to look like one of the end users.
As Professor Susan Crawford explains: “It’s as if someone else that sounded like you got on the phone as you were talking to your mother and said, ‘We need to hang up right now.’ ”
Comcast’s behavior, which AP calls “the most drastic example yet of data discrimination by a U.S. Internet service provider,” is what a world without Net Neutrality looks like.
[...]
http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/
Posted October 19th, 2007 at 9:43 PM by Robert Nelson
Comcast has been under fire over the past few months, where customers have been accusing them of interfering with BitTorrent traffic. Comcast has replied by flat-out denying the accusation.
The Associated Press did some tests and have stated that they believe Comcast is actively interfering with peer-to-peer networks. The tests used a copy of the King James Bible, which was used because it’s not protected by copyright and the file is a convenient size at 4.24MB. The file transfer was tested using a Time Warner Cable, Cablevison, AT&T and Comcast connection. Their testing showed that Comcast was the only network that had trouble.
The Associated Press did some tests and have stated that they believe Comcast is actively interfering with peer-to-peer networks. The tests used a copy of the King James Bible, which was used because it’s not protected by copyright and the file is a convenient size at 4.24MB. The file transfer was tested using a Time Warner Cable, Cablevison, AT&T and Comcast connection. Their testing showed that Comcast was the only network that had trouble.
http://www.gadgetell.com/2007/10/comcast-blocking-bittorrent-traffic/
I wish I could supply further information, but I just found this out. I'll post more if I find more information.
I need to start finding bipartisan or neutral websites....
November 15th, 2007 by lerskine
A Comcast subscriber has filed a lawsuit against the nation’s largest ISP for blocking peer-to-peer file sharing programs such as BitTorrent. The lawsuit charges Comcast with unfair business practices and seeks class action status — which could mean compensation to California customers.
This complaint comes on the heels of a petition filed by SavetheInternet.com asking the Federal Communications Commission to stop Comcast from such actions because they violate Net Neutrality.
The San Francisco Bay Area subscriber, Jon Hart, charges that Comcast markets its high-speed service “based on claims of ‘lightning fast’ and ‘mind-blowing’ speeds [and promises] ‘unfettered access to all the internet has to offer.’ Nevertheless, [Comcast companies] intentionally and severely impede the use of certain internet applications by their customers…” Hart has built his case around deceptive practices by the cable giant.
Read the lawsuit against Comcast.
Harold Feld of the Media Access Project applauds the lawsuit, but says we need a broader solution: “While I’m glad there’s a Comcast subscriber willing to take this on, I don’t think consumer protection should have to depend on subscribers spending their time, effort, and money… At the very least, the FCC should make it clear that this is not appropriate.”
SavetheInternet.com partners Free Press and Public Knowledge have also asked the FCC to fine Comcast $195,000 for every affected subscriber to deter future violations.
This complaint comes on the heels of a petition filed by SavetheInternet.com asking the Federal Communications Commission to stop Comcast from such actions because they violate Net Neutrality.
The San Francisco Bay Area subscriber, Jon Hart, charges that Comcast markets its high-speed service “based on claims of ‘lightning fast’ and ‘mind-blowing’ speeds [and promises] ‘unfettered access to all the internet has to offer.’ Nevertheless, [Comcast companies] intentionally and severely impede the use of certain internet applications by their customers…” Hart has built his case around deceptive practices by the cable giant.
Read the lawsuit against Comcast.
Harold Feld of the Media Access Project applauds the lawsuit, but says we need a broader solution: “While I’m glad there’s a Comcast subscriber willing to take this on, I don’t think consumer protection should have to depend on subscribers spending their time, effort, and money… At the very least, the FCC should make it clear that this is not appropriate.”
SavetheInternet.com partners Free Press and Public Knowledge have also asked the FCC to fine Comcast $195,000 for every affected subscriber to deter future violations.
http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/
Of course, I'll post any new information I find.
