Comcast's Closed Internet
Submitted by alynn on February 15, 2008 - 12:10am.
The FCC investigation of Comcast's violations of Net Neutrality is in full swing. Thousands of Free Press activists have weighed in, and yesterday Free Press and its allies in the SavetheInternet.com Coalition filed extensive research and legal analysis of what Comcast is doing (if you have been following the issue closely, you should enjoy all 100 pages).
Comcast is now playing defense.
Employing 10 lawyers and countless minions, Comcast claimed in its filing that the crippling of innovative online video competitors such as BitTorrent, Vuze and Miro is no big deal. It is referring to the miniscule .01 percent of users who actually use the bandwidth they pay for every month. This is completely false -- even their army of high priced lawyers couldn't mask their true actions.
Let's review what we know about Comcast's actions:
1. It is crippling the content-delivery systems that have emerged as real threat to its $17 billion video business - and it's own plans to dominate online video.
2. The company is limiting access for everyone -- not just the mythical "bandwidth hogs." Comcast isn't just blocking the .01 percent from using these programs. They're are also cutting off the other 99.99% -- regardless of the size of the files being transferred. (The AP couldn't even download a copy of the Bible.)
3. Comcast promised the public and the FCC over and over again that it has no reason to limit people's connection and would never do so. Let's review the history:
* Comcast, December 2000: We will value an open Internet.
* Comcast, May 2003: We don't prevent our customers from doing anything.
* Comcast, August 2007: We do not mess with your connection.
* Comcast, October 2007: We (only slightly) mess with your connection, but it is "reasonable network management."
* Comcast, February 2008: We mess with your connection and you can't do anything about it.
That's right. Now, the Comcast lawyer army claims that the company can do whatever it wants with its network -- and the FCC can't do anything about it.
Why the change of heart? What they said in 2000 and 2003 was before innovative new peer-to-peer companies offered viable alternatives to Comcast customers. It's no stretch to envision a future where these customers are free of the cable cartel and going online where they only pay for what they want. (Note: Comcast just reported a 14 percent increase in revenue plus a 54 percent increase in net income. That equals undervalued and angry Comcast customers).
The company's claim that this is a fair way to manage the network is bogus. Comcast has many other options that do not discriminate. For example:
1. Comcast could put a cap on how much bandwidth each customer can use (This is the cheap, lazy and unpopular option)
2. Comcast could deal with the infamous .01 percent on a case-by-case basis (The company's stated method in years past).
3. Or Comcast could listen to consumers and perform the badly needed upgrades to their network (That would be smart and quite feasible given its financial health. Did I mention that 54% increase?)
But instead, they've decided to censor your Internet traffic and declare war on consumers.
Here's the bottom line: Comcast is violating net neutrality and threatening the future of online video. The FCC needs to stop them and stand up for the 99.9 percent of us who pay the commissioners' salaries.
And Congress needs to make sure the law prevents discrimination so that the free and open Internet stays that way. So call up your Reps and get them on the new Net Neutrality bill.
Comcast is now playing defense.
Employing 10 lawyers and countless minions, Comcast claimed in its filing that the crippling of innovative online video competitors such as BitTorrent, Vuze and Miro is no big deal. It is referring to the miniscule .01 percent of users who actually use the bandwidth they pay for every month. This is completely false -- even their army of high priced lawyers couldn't mask their true actions.
Let's review what we know about Comcast's actions:
1. It is crippling the content-delivery systems that have emerged as real threat to its $17 billion video business - and it's own plans to dominate online video.
2. The company is limiting access for everyone -- not just the mythical "bandwidth hogs." Comcast isn't just blocking the .01 percent from using these programs. They're are also cutting off the other 99.99% -- regardless of the size of the files being transferred. (The AP couldn't even download a copy of the Bible.)
3. Comcast promised the public and the FCC over and over again that it has no reason to limit people's connection and would never do so. Let's review the history:
* Comcast, December 2000: We will value an open Internet.
* Comcast, May 2003: We don't prevent our customers from doing anything.
* Comcast, August 2007: We do not mess with your connection.
* Comcast, October 2007: We (only slightly) mess with your connection, but it is "reasonable network management."
* Comcast, February 2008: We mess with your connection and you can't do anything about it.
That's right. Now, the Comcast lawyer army claims that the company can do whatever it wants with its network -- and the FCC can't do anything about it.
Why the change of heart? What they said in 2000 and 2003 was before innovative new peer-to-peer companies offered viable alternatives to Comcast customers. It's no stretch to envision a future where these customers are free of the cable cartel and going online where they only pay for what they want. (Note: Comcast just reported a 14 percent increase in revenue plus a 54 percent increase in net income. That equals undervalued and angry Comcast customers).
The company's claim that this is a fair way to manage the network is bogus. Comcast has many other options that do not discriminate. For example:
1. Comcast could put a cap on how much bandwidth each customer can use (This is the cheap, lazy and unpopular option)
2. Comcast could deal with the infamous .01 percent on a case-by-case basis (The company's stated method in years past).
3. Or Comcast could listen to consumers and perform the badly needed upgrades to their network (That would be smart and quite feasible given its financial health. Did I mention that 54% increase?)
But instead, they've decided to censor your Internet traffic and declare war on consumers.
Here's the bottom line: Comcast is violating net neutrality and threatening the future of online video. The FCC needs to stop them and stand up for the 99.9 percent of us who pay the commissioners' salaries.
And Congress needs to make sure the law prevents discrimination so that the free and open Internet stays that way. So call up your Reps and get them on the new Net Neutrality bill.
»
- alynn's blog
- Login/register to comment
