Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

Comcast tries to dodge fraud issue in P2P throttling lawsuit

9 July 2008 15:59 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 9 comments

Since last year's revelation that Comcast was indeed throttling BitTorrent traffic from customers of their broadband internet service it brought them to the attention of the FCC, where they're already vigorously defending themselves. They've cited a lack of specific rules outlawing their "network management" techniques as proof they've done nothing wrong. They're also being sued in California, where a judge has granted them a stay, pending the FCC's decision.

The California lawsuit does make claims of illegal interference with network traffic, but it also alleges false advertising. The plaintiffs claim that Comcast is advertising more than they're actually delivering when it comes to high speed internet service. The judge has indicated that only the FCC has jurisdiction over traffic management, agreeing with an argument made by Comcast attorneys who wrote the following.

"Because these issues are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the FCC, and because the FCC is actively investigating them, this Court should stay its hand under the primary jurisdiction doctrine."

Here's where things get complicated. Even though the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction over false advertising claims the judge is waiting to issue a decision on thiem until the FCC investigation is concluded. He writes that they're "sufficiently interrelated with the network management issue such that it cannot be said that the FCC�s consideration and determination of the network management issue will have no impact on resolution of these claims."

Although there's been some noise around the internet about how this is a reversal of Comcast's earlier position in an FCC filing, it's actually not. In fact they've always acknowledged the FCC's authority to regulate network management practices. And of course Comcast representatives have been quick to point this out, but they conveniently dodge the issue of false advertising.

It's perfectly legal to sell a car that's limited to a top speed of 60 miles per hour. That doesn't mean you can claim it will keep up with a Ferrari.

Permalink to this article | Topic: Lawsuits & Legislation

Comcast has new traffic 'throttling' system (20 August 2008)

EFF releases tool that hunts BitTorrent throttling ISPs (3 August 2008)

FCC set to punish Comcast for breaking net neutrality laws (27 July 2008)

New class action lawsuit against Comcast in Federal Court (23 July 2008)

FCC Chairman wants penalties imposed on Comcast (12 July 2008)

First annual P2P conference announced (9 July 2008)

Comcast sued over BitTorrent throttling (9 June 2008)

Comcast invests in P2P streaming startup (20 May 2008)

Cox also throttled torrent traffic (15 May 2008)

We don't throttle P2P users, says AT&T (27 April 2008)

Comcast wants a P2P "Bill of Rights" (16 April 2008)

FCC chairman hints at action against Comcast (11 March 2008)

Comcast limits public access to FCC hearing by paying to fill seats (27 February 2008)

FCC chairman ready to take on ISPs over net neutrality (25 February 2008)

FCC to consider net neutrality and ISP network management (12 February 2008)

« Previous news article
Study shows a third of US and UK residents copying DVDs

Next news article »
Universal lawyers call MediaSentry investigators, not experts

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
Azuran (Newbie) 9 July 2008 16:37
*Quote:* It's perfectly legal to sell a car that's limited to a top speed of 60 miles per hour. That doesn't mean you can claim it will keep up with a Ferrari. Word. [ + quote]
ZippyDSM (AfterDawn Addict) 9 July 2008 17:00
point laugh HA HA! [ + quote]
SDF_GR (Member) 9 July 2008 19:15
*Quote:* It's perfectly legal to sell a car that's limited to a top speed of 60 miles per hour. That doesn't mean you can claim it will keep up with a Ferrari. I have a jeep that that has top speed 80klm per hour, and yes it is way faster than a ferrari can go........on ice! [ + quote]
7thsinger (AfterDawn Addict) 9 July 2008 22:30
*Originally posted by ZippyDSM:* point laugh HA HA! Lol. Sums it up. :) [ + quote]
B33rdrnkr (Newbie) 10 July 2008 17:58
I hope comcast gets what they deserve... [ + quote]
1bonehead (Senior Member) 11 July 2008 20:44
*Originally posted by B33rdrnkr:* I hope comcast gets what they deserve... Me too. The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above! The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. [ + quote]
iluvendo (AfterDawn Addict) 12 July 2008 3:47
THey already lost here http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/682270 And now they are trying to escape again ? If it wasnt for bad luck, Id have no luck! "The flimsier the product,the higher the price" Ferengi 82nd rule of aquisition [ + quote]
Mez (Senior Member) 14 July 2008 10:17
I agree with 7thsinger, Zippy you have done it again! I only thing I can add is they are being more fair than that. According to all my neighbors they have been throttling them as well. They do not know what is going on but they all claim their service is much slower than it used to be. Some do not have networks and their kids are too young for p2p (I think). They are reaming anyone that is in an area with only one carrier. They only get one barrel. If you do ANY p2p you get both. I bet they are much more afraid of this judge than the FCC. I know I would be! [ + quote]
BLUESGUY (Newbie) 17 July 2008 13:51
they're crooks, alright. if you cancel their service, they keep billing you. if you refuse to pay for service you don't receive they sic the bill collectors on you. I'll never give those sob's another dime. [ + quote]