Heavy Internet users unplugged by US cable company

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
news.yahoo.com
afp.google.com
blog.thestar.com.my
asia.cnet.com

[edit on 9-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]

I have a real problem with these sort of actions. I'm not sure how it is in the US, but in Malaysia, the largest ISP, TM Net, has promised "unlimited access" and bandwidth that is determined by how much we pay monthly. Yet when certain users download heavily, they penalize those user by throttling down the bandwidth.

Just like Comcast, TM Net argues "these downloaders are slowing down other people's bandwidth." The problem with this sort of argument is that they have promised as an ISP, to provide "unlimited access". Therefore the onus is on them to provide more bandwidth, not limit the bandwidth of others.

If they want to limit the bandwidth, they shouldn't have promised what they can't deliver. I'm sure the story is the same on the US side.

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Somewhere deep inside me I feel like screaming over this.........it feels like everywhere I look somebody or other is trying to be IN CHARGE........telling us what how and when to even drink water or go to the bathroom.

Unlimited access SHOULD be what it says it is.........or they should rename it to limited.

As mad as this makes me, it does not surprise me.

My opinion....I PAY for my Internet. The contract says UNLIMITED. I absolutely agree with the previous posts.

I have Comcast Corporate Fiber at the office so I doubt it would occur with me (yet) but everyone I know uses Comcast.

Ehhh...this is just something else that proves what corporate America is. Everything is anti-consumer. There is no customer service, no 'the customer is always right', no consumer rights at all.

It's sad. Really.

Why are you people getting upset?

These people getting cut off are using BT quit heavily so what do you expect?

In the end its illegal so why complain, get another ISP who doesnt care that you are uploading/downloading day and night or put up with it!

reply to post by Fett Pinkus

---

Because it is a breach of contract. Besides, not everything on BT is illegal. And what if they weren't using torrents? What if they were using FTP? I have acquaintances who work in music studios and they use FTP to transfer the raw WAV files. A typical 3 minute audio track is about 30-40MB. They have their bandwidth throttled down, too.

Comcast should rename themselves to ComCRAP. I wouldn't use them at all but they're the only option here if you want to have broadband.

Their commercials always boast about their "speedboost" which is utterly bogus B.S. because it isn't a bit faster than any other broadband isp I've had. They hammer your ports to death trying to spy on you if you ever use bittorrent, they're the most notorious anti-p2p isp there is.

They took over Adelphia but are a much suckier company than Adelphia ever thought about being.

i have comcast,and im upset that they would do this... i for one use alot! of BW and if thet try to threat'n me with cut off... ill just drop service,like it is said when you sign up for it... "unlimited"! and i think its BS that they cant pump up the BW if they want to so all customers can have a great connection... they should cap it .. not shut you down.

reply to post by Fett Pinkus

---

BT ... BitTorrent ... have you been there? You might want to check out their site. BitTorrent.com ... guess what, you PAY for the movies and shows. It is NOT FREE. Well, some is ... they had that old classic Nosferatu as a free download ... but it is a LEGALLY FREE download.

Get you facts straight before you make all-encompassing statements. I am sure BitTorrent would love to hear your slander against their company, no?

You also realize, some of the torrent sites you sign up to, and pay a monthly fee to access the content ... you know, they have deals with the people who own them ... I guess for those who don't know, think iTunes and PodCast, but better quality and faster transfers ... but a bit more expensive.


Seriously. I pay for unlimited access. If I am sending home videos to my friends and family, and if I was OCD at taking videos of stuff (I like my fish, maybe I want to send a few hours of footage of him swimming around ) ... then I have that right to do so at whatever rate they promised me for as long as I want.

So if that is 8 Mbps (which is only 1 MBps ... which is about 18 minutes per GB at full speed) then I should have full access to that 24/7, that is my perrogative for the $50/month. Otherwise, why pay so much?

Really, for me, that example would have to be in reverse, since, my line is asymmetrical and can only upload at around 512 Kbps (67 KBps) ... it would take much, much longer for me to share videos than get some from my friend and family. Yes, people do that. In fact, we have Cox cable, and their high-speed ad shows grandparents sending videos to their grandkids online

You do also realize that some families have 3 or 4 computers hooked up, plus gaming machines, right? So, if a couple computers are occupied with online PC games, one is chatting with a webcam, the parental unit is surfing and downloading freeware programs, and another is on the 360 downloading movies bought with MS points, playing an online game with webcam ... they don't have the right to utilize bandwidth? You have to be kidding me.

I personally have two gaming systems online, a third capable, two computers connected ... I can imagine others have much more stuff hooked up than I do alone.

I guess you just assume that everyone is doing wrong, you justify the company violating their contract with the customer ... well, they should refund them if they cannot make the commitment. It is very sad you jump to a negative conclusion. No wonder the world is falling apart if you are calling people thieves without any right or evidence. Deny ignorance.

Have you ever actually used BitTorrent for yourself? Trust me, you can use it to download movies/music/software illegally for free, as thousands of people do. It is a P2P file sharing client.




If a family had 3 or 4 computers all downloading heavily at the same time, the bandwidth would be split between them. Say if the family has a 20mbps connection and they are all using it, it would be split so that each computer would only be using 5mb anyway. So the maximum bandwidth the collective household could go at would be 20mb anyway, it would never go past that, no matter how many computers were in there.

Anyway if the household and the ISP have signed a contract saying that the household can use 20mb 24/7 unlimited, then they cant turn around and complain when the household uses it.

Come to think of it, I had the same problem a while ago. I was sharing a flat in which all of the flatmates were sharing a 10mb connection and NTL decided to limit our speed (it was very noticable and we did speed tests before and after). We called them and they came out with some half-arsed excuses about accidentally putting us on the wrong server or something, then they took the limiter off. Then after about a week they put it back on again so we just canceled our subscription.

They even admitted that they do it on a wide scale - www.theregister.co.uk...

I know they might be a bit annoyed if people are utilising their connection to the max, but if the ISP can't handle heavy loads then it shouldn't offer unlimited service. And if it cant cope with high bandwidth usage like that then it shouldn't be one of the biggest ISPs in the nation.

I got sick of the main ISP here in Australia, Telstra Bigpond, so tommorow I'm submitting my payment info to TPG. I get double the downloads, increased speed, and it doesn't count uploads, all for $10 less a month. I've been hammering Telstra relentlessly on the phone double checking that I won't be charged for switching providers, but there's bound to be some line hidden on Pg 242, Para 8, Line 2 that states I now owe then $800 or something. Bloody cheap bastards.

If you don't like your ISP, SWITCH! It's like those people that complain about improper advertising. If you don't like it, don't watch it, silly!

While you can use BT for nefarious activities there are also many legitimate and perfectly legal uses as well (ie. Linux distros for one). The point here is that P2P is not completely illegal and does have its merits. Just because its P2P doesn't make it wrong.

Most of you need to carefully re-read your contracts. Most, not all, have sections stating that said companies can make changes as they see fit relative to their operations. Afterall it is their network and typically their gear (at least up to the demarc). They have an obligation to provide adequate bandwidth to all customers and in doing so this may require end user changes including throttling. I'm surprised they would outright just end the service for some of these power users without at least throttling or rate shaping them first. However these corporations usually have enough lawyer spew in their contracts for these very reasons. As many have stated if you don't like it try another provider.

brill

Even capping the connection is a breach of contract. If the contract says "unlimited" at say, 2Mbps (Megabit, not MegaByte, another thing ISPs don't tell you... but that's another story), then capping it would make it not unlimited. If they throttle it down, which is what a lot of ISPs tend to do, then it's no longer 2Mbps.

The only acceptable course of action is to either provide more bandwidth or give a rebate. Capping it, throttling it down or disconnections, these are all considered a breach of contract and you as a consumer have a right to take legal action.

[edit on 9-9-2007 by Beachcoma]

Didnt you know? Comcast is part of the NWO. I got off it when the bills started to become astronomically expensive...as far as i'm concerned, they "S" anyway and they can keep their service.

Dictatorship seems to be popping up all over the place. You pay for a service, i dont care how heavily you use it, you pay for it and there's nothing in the fine print that prevents you from overuse.

Who the hell do they think they are?

bush?

It wouldn't be such a problem for me if we (as in the people of Malaysia) had a choice of different ISPs. But in this country, TM Net is a virtual monopoly. Fortunately we are not completely apathetic yet. So after we, the consumers, threatened a class action law suit, the ISP made a compromise and throttled down the bandwidth only during the day -- at least until they upgrade their total bandwidth. If no improvements are made by the time promised, TM Net will see us in court.

From what I can gather, Comcast is the among the largest ISP in the US. And the US is a large country. So I'm guessing in certain areas, they're the only ISP. Hence I can relate to the issue. Perhaps you people in the States can band together and threaten a class action suit?

Don't let them get away with it, or they'll be tempted to repeat it on a wider scale. By then it would be too late. Then the proposed "tiered services" will become more attractive to consumers who don't know their rights. Then we'd see the internet being less open and more clustered. Information would be controlled again.

It's just what the NWO wants.

Yeah peeps - don't trust what the contract is called, you have to read the fine print.... Not most but ALL providers have clauses to prevent abuse in there - call it evil and wrong but it is in there. Most if not all also have more expensive plans for "commercial" use, etc. Devil is in the details and you need to read those TOS pages and not simply clicky on the "agree" button....

Example - grandma and grandpa smith have signed up and use their service off and on during the day like most normal people. Up the street, some enterprising porn producer wannabe has the same service and has 25 servers going at wire speed. I think we can see that the actual resources consumed are far different and the providers can and do want to catch those folks that are heavy users of the system and make them pay accordingly.

Example 2 - you are a provider and have bought a 100Mbs line for 2000/mo wholesale. You want to offer a 10Mbs service. If 10 people use that line full bore wire speed their monthly would have to be at minimum in the 200/mo range. Through the magic of "normal" variable use that most users exhibit, you can actually get more like 100 people on that line and charge something like 20+/mo. If just a few people max their use all the time, you can see the problem that will ensue.... Those heavy users are taking more than their "fair" share of that reduced price service ("because I can") and that's what the little read clauses in the actual contract terms specify if you read closely.

Disclosure - I do not work for any provider, but I did sell and install carrier grade NMS monitoring systems that the providers used to manage and catch this stuff - sorry.... I understand the frustrations but that is how things work in the real world where things do cost money. You may think the providers gouge but I can assure you the margins are not that great and it's only the volume that generates any meaningful profits for providers....

Comcast is just a nitch provider. Everywhere you can't get a big dog like Time Warner, you'll find Comcast.

They aren't yet too big to be killed.

It is interesting to note that they're going after big downloaders... the people the Feds really don't care about. It's the big uploaders, people that are actively distributing pirated media, that get the attention of the suits.

Although I don't actually see BT explicitly mentioned in the source article, the Bittorrent protocol is widely used by legitimate software providers to accelerate their users' download rates. There are far superior P2P apps out there, so no need to focus the discussion on torrents.

It comes down to what's in the contract. Regardless I would be thrilled to see a class action come out of this. Even if there's a line saying "We can stab you in your sleep with used heroin needles and give you AIDS," if they actually start to do it, there's always a way to sue them.

I'm just glad AT&T doesn't seem to care too much about downloading. Sure, a few packets here and there get funneled through the NSA, but as long as there's no strings of plaintext like Jihad, President Bush, Assassinate, Praise Allah, Atomic Bomb, White House, etc... they don't care.

LOL, don't say that.

You'll be scaring people that register for forums or install video games without reading the EULA, xD.

many many countries around the world have a FUP or Fair Use Policy for broadband - i would be very surprised if comcast and time warner doesn`t have one to be honest - it`ll be buried in your contract - but downloading 80 gig a month is excessive - as to be honest , what teh heck are you downloading - 80 gig is a massive amount!