how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2002-04-29 12:22:50: A spirited debate rages in our AT&T forum over one user, who uncapped his cable modem and immediately felt the ire of AT&T: no service. ..
|
  titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Nope... You take the chance -- now suffer the consequences. | |
| |  nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Re: Nope... I think a lifetime of no service is a bit harsh.
Particularly if it's someone who didn't understand what they were doing.. or a friend helped out ("hey, I can get your connection to work faster, how cool is this!", "uh, okay, that's like, cool, dude"). Not everyone understands the difference between, say a caching utility and uncapping a modem. Ridiculous as that may sound.
I think there should be a warning.. "do this again, you're toast". Even with a speeding ticket you will often get a warning first.
--
Angels and demons dancing in my head, lunatics and monsters underneath my bed. | |
| | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... I wasn't given a warning for my speeding ticket -- I lost my license for 4 months. Then I hear of someone else doing it at a faster speed (15 miles an hour faster to be exact) and all they had to do was pay a fine and be on there way. Same state, same county.
That is besides the point however.
I agree with you, it is harsh, but fair.
Anyone that uncaps their service KNOWS what they are doing, I don't care what the program said it did... how can you NOT notice an increase in speeds as great as they more then likely were set at? 1.5mbps/128kbps is a pretty low standard yes, however you can tell when you are tweaked to the max or when you are 'exceeding your speed limit'. | |
| | | | | | Re: Nope... Okay, so someone realizes they are speeding, to keep this metaphor going. If your not technically savvy, and you have a program that does it, or a friend does it, what if your in the position of not knowing how to undo it?
You'll have to find someone who knows how to undo the damage, depending on how complex it was for that modem in particular. You can't just call your BB Prov. and say hey, "I lost the cap on my modem, can you please turn it back on." They'll cut you off so fast it'll make your head spin. If you ask why they would, simple. You shouldn't have been messing with your modem in the first place.
TOS Need to have the repercussions listed in them, I agree. But we also need a punishment that fits the crime.
--
I miss my dial-up modem... It was an error correcting modem... I seem to have so many typo's lately..... | |
| | | |  Frankis chillingPremium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere | you lost your license for 4 months on your first speeding ticket? WTF? you should have gone to court, they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS reduce the amount of points/penalties for speeding if you plea bargain in court. Specifically I got an over $300 + 4 point ticket for going 50 in a 25mph zone reduced to 0 points + 98$ charge.
...244 | |
| | | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... said by i244:
you lost your license for 4 months on your first speeding ticket? WTF? you should have gone to court, they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS reduce the amount of points/penalties for speeding if you plea bargain in court. Specifically I got an over $300 + 4 point ticket for going 50 in a 25mph zone reduced to 0 points + 98$ charge.
...244
I did go to court... twice | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Nope... how fast were you going?? 120 or something? | |
|
| | |
| | | Stealing is stealing. This is like the Napsterites who say that they should be allowed to download copyrighted music because Sony/BMG/Arista, etc. are charging too much. Because of these people, we are now have copy proof CD's so I can't play the CD on my computer, or rip the music to my own MP3 player.
How is uncapping a modem any different? You get what you pay for, and if you don't, then drop the service and go to DSL or dial-up. Perhaps you'll get what you pay for there. A lifetime ban is harsh, yes--but if I were a store owner and caught someone stealing, I wouldn't welcome that individual back into my establishment. Who's to say he wouldn't steal again? Same goes for hacking/uncapping a cable modem. | |
| | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Nope... I don't think there is an argument that uncapping is wrong...
The question is should it be an immediate cut off of your service, especially considering they state that NAT and p2p are against TOS yet allow both to occur?
Should there not be a warning? And shouldn't AT&T correct the flaws that allow uncapping to begin with?
Should a user who was toying around with his modem cause his parents to lose their service?
...typos...
[text was edited by author 2002-04-29 13:04:25] | |
| | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... said by Leviathan:
Should a user who was toying around with his modem cause his parents to lose their service?
Any parents that let the child use the computer and do their own thing unattended and such - yes. Kids are notorious for getting into trouble and messing with things they are not supposed to - why would a computer be any different, there are lots of hackers out there.
Never leave anything of any importance unattended. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... said by Leviathan:
That's more easily said than done, particularly with the vast amount of dual working parents.
Sometimes good kids do bad things. Should your broadband service be completely shut off because of it?
If you are letting your kids do things on your computer or even on there own set rules for them... or just get an OS that is worth a darn and don't give them admin privaleges. | |
| | | | | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Nope... Of course. But what if your otherwise smart kid makes a mistake (Yes, those happen) and downloads an uncapping file, or foolishly follows some instructions on a website.
Do you think it's still fair that your service be turned off? Would you say "Well, my son made a mistake, that's fair play I suppose that I am now without a connection".
If you'd do the latter you're a better man than I.
Besides, most parents learn everything they know about their computer from their kid to begin with. Kind of tough to monitor what he's doing if you have no clue what anything he's doing is.
--
dead american hero | |
| | | | | | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... True, I would just not have a kid.. heh, nah, im jk about that one.
It is tough to monitor what someone else in your household does on your computer - yes, however tell your kids the consequences of doing things, and yes if my son/daughter were to do something like that I would accept the fate -- I would be pissed off to no tomorrow, but in the end it is my fault for giving them access to my equipment. | |
|
| | |  nc1165
join:2001-04-10
Delray Beach, FL | How about "civil disobedience" as an argument. I would bet if enough people did it as a collective effort, AT&T would revise their ToS overnight. The consequence would be that they would have to disconnect (potentially) all of their customers.
Prepare the "Million Modem March" to uncap bandwidth!
Next question - would organizing such a protest result in any type of criminal prosecution?
--
If my enemy cuts me, I will drown him in my own blood. | |
| | | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA
| Re: Nope... said by nc1165:
Next question - would organizing such a protest result in any type of criminal prosecution?
might be considered a terrorist act now in the US because of the sept. 11th tradgedy.
who knows though.
[text was edited by author 2002-04-29 13:32:55] | |
|
| | |  HallPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH
kudos:1 | said by Leviathan:
Should a user who was toying around with his modem cause his parents to lose their service?
If my son throws a rock at a street light and breaks it, should he pay to fix it ?? Yeah, he should, but he has no money nor any source of money. Should the taxpayers of the city pay for it ?? Absolutely not.
Who pays for it in the end ?? The parents do... Until your children turn 18, they are YOUR responsibility. You may "pay" for their actions.
--
-= Mindspring MaxDSL via Covad 1536/384 TeleSurfer Pro =- | |
| | | | | |
| |  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | said by tigers:
Stealing is stealing. This is like the Napsterites who say that they should be allowed to download copyrighted music because Sony/BMG/Arista, etc. are charging too much. Because of these people, we are now have copy proof CD's so I can't play the CD on my computer, or rip the music to my own MP3 player.
no, the reason sony/bmg/arista are using copy proof cd's is because they are greedy AND because these huge companies haven't realized the potential of the new delivery system.
--
If we continue to ignore the Palestinian plight and instead reinforce the idea that Israel can do no wrong, then we should not be surprised when an event similar to Sept 11 occurs again in this country. | |
| | | | | | Re: Nope... said by shatty925:
no, the reason sony/bmg/arista are using copy proof cd's is because they are greedy AND because these huge companies haven't realized the potential of the new delivery system.
I agree that the record labels have not embraced the potential of the new media types, but to use that as justification to steal is just plain wrong. | |
| | | | | morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | Re: Nope... said by tigers:
said by shatty925:
no, the reason sony/bmg/arista are using copy proof cd's is because they are greedy AND because these huge companies haven't realized the potential of the new delivery system.
I agree that the record labels have not embraced the potential of the new media types, but to use that as justification to steal is just plain wrong.
that's not justification to steal. making copy proof/computer proof cds is not justification for preventing theft. by doing so you assume that everyone is guilty, and punish everyone.
i'd like to see how our society would work if a similar policy were in effect: some people have car wrecks when they turn right, therefore no one can ever turn right. or, some people murder others with steak knives, therefore, no one should be allowed to use steak knives.
--
If we continue to ignore the Palestinian plight and instead reinforce the idea that Israel can do no wrong, then we should not be surprised when an event similar to Sept 11 occurs again in this country. | |
|
| | | | said by tigers:
Stealing is stealing. This is like the Napsterites who say that they should be allowed to download copyrighted music because Sony/BMG/Arista, etc. are charging too much. Because of these people, we are now have copy proof CD's so I can't play the CD on my computer, or rip the music to my own MP3 player.
You do realize, in the eyes of the RIAA, you're just as guilty as the people who download music, don't you? | |
| | | | | | Re: Nope... said by TheWickerMan:
said by tigers:
Stealing is stealing. This is like the Napsterites who say that they should be allowed to download copyrighted music because Sony/BMG/Arista, etc. are charging too much. Because of these people, we are now have copy proof CD's so I can't play the CD on my computer, or rip the music to my own MP3 player.
You do realize, in the eyes of the RIAA, you're just as guilty as the people who download music, don't you?
RIAA might think that's wrong, but the courts are on my side on that particular issue.
Where the courts ARE NOT on my side is when I go and download all this copyrighted music from Kazaa/Morpheus/whatever. That is stealing. There is no gray area there--despite the justification some people try and use to legitimize it.
I sure would like to have a BMW 7-series, but I'm not going to go steal one just because I think BMW charges too much for it. | |
|
| | | I think that if the ISP is going to be that harsh on someone for un-capping there modem they should first make sure that the users are even able to hit the cap placed. I've had my cable service for about 10 months now and have never been able to hit the 3000kbps cap thats placed on my modem. The closest has been around 2600 once and I average around 1500-2200, but have had it drop below 56 at least 2 times a week. They try to say that its best to use there service on off-peak hours for better download speeds. Well what's the point of having a service if the best time to use it is when normal people sleep? I think that if your going to provide a service at least make sure your going to be able to provide that service 24/7 to ensure that there's less tampering with equipment. Then and only then should a provider be able to go as far as to deny someone service forever. | |
| |  bistro777Donuts-Is There Anything They Can't Do?Premium
join:2002-02-07
Englewood, CO | I agree with you. If you uncap the modem and get 1.5 Meg instead of 256k or fiddle with the box and get 150 channels instead of 50 - - - you simply hafta know you're getting something for nothing. It’s theft of services no matter how you look at it. Simple as that. The 'I didn't understand' excuse doesn't work. Example: Even if you can’t build an internal combustion engine, if you do 120 mph in a school zone, you still know it's against the ‘ToS’ for holding a driver’s license.
That said, how many of us sign a credit card application, a U-Haul rental form or a car loan, or click 'I accept' for software licensing or ordering something online, and can honestly say, 'Yeah, I read and remember the WHOLE thing.' Nonetheless, it’s ‘caveat emptor’ and RTFM before you fool with Mother Nature, AT&T or any ISP that provides a service under its terms, not yours. So as Robert Blake will soon learn, ‘Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time...’
I’d introduce myself, but I already know who I am. | |
| |  KrispyPremium,VIP
join:2001-12-11
the stix
kudos:1 | As has been said in many ways in this thread...if you're able to uncap your modem then odds are you're well aware that you're doing something wrong. I also believe that AT&T reacted so swiftly due to alot of press over caps in the past few weeks, they wanted to make an example and unfortunetly it was this guy.
Should he get life without service...no.
Will he get life without service...no.
I highly doubt many of these large companies are able to track a user so well that they can say with certainity he'll never have service - move in with girlfriend, sign up under her name and voila. Or sign up with a reseller and voila. Just trying to say that I wouldn't necessarily be crying a river for the guy.
An AUP is a legal document that is created out of need due to the excessive acts of the minority. P2P application aren't a bad thing until you get the guy who leaves it on 24/7. Servers aren't a bad thing until you get the guy who consistently leaves an open relay or runs a high profile porn site off a residential account. I think if people keep pushing for an 'exact' version of an AUP then that's what they'll eventually get and there won't be any leeway for the remaining people that are not doing anything wrong. It's like speeding...go 10-20 over and odds are you won't get stopped, get a lobby group together who harrasses the hell out of their local politician and suddenly everyone doing 2 over is ticketed.
As for the 'what if someone sends you a program...what if a friend tweaks your system...etc', at some point people have to start being responsible for their systems whether they want to or not and, unfortunetly, it seems that this is becoming the ISP's job these days.
Regardless of the speeds you're getting or the service from the reps we all know it's wrong and if you choose to do it anyway you'll have to live with the consquences. | |
| | | | | Re: Nope... Is this guy not allowed to have an account with any ISP now, or just not one with AT&T broadband? | |
| | | | | | Re: Nope... I'm sure it's just AT@T broadband. Of course every business reserves the right to refuse service to anyone, so another ISP could say they don't want him as a customer. | |
| | | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Nope... I was going 65 in a 45 | |
|
| | | Down with them... They stink | |
| | | | So, what's a reasonable price / fine as punishment for uncapping a modem?
What is the financial impact of "stealing" bandwidth?
How many more GB than average or than this particular user normally consumes?
If 1 GB/month is worth about $2, then just how much was stolen?
$10? $50? $100?
What are current typical legal punishments / fines for stealing $10, $50, $100 ... ?
At the end of the day, the phraseology will be about what is "reasonable".
--
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all other forms of government. - Winston Churchill | |
|
 MowerMan5Premium
join:2001-04-07
Fort Worth, TX | How come ATT sets it up like that? Just curious, but why does AT&T set up their service so that end users have the ability to uncap themselves. Even though it may be an extensive process to do so--why in the world did they set it up that way? Is there not a way for them to cap a customer in such a way that the customer can't tamper with it? | |
| | nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 Host:
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Re: How come ATT sets it up like that? We've debated this one before in the AT&T forum and it was suggested that the lines are capped downstream from the modem.. I do think that is the case in some locations but not nationwide. We've had users who posted they were able to uncap their modems as well as ones who tried and it didn't work. That leads me to believe this is the case.
I certainly do think if the punishment is to have lifetime of no service, AT&T at least ought to prevent users from doing it easily..
I hope some of the techs who work for AT&T and know the system well can post more specific information on how that cap is really implemented.. (but not if it's proprietary info, wouldn't want anyone losing a job over a debate!)
--
Angels and demons dancing in my head, lunatics and monsters underneath my bed. | |
|
RayWPremium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1 | Apples and oranges I note that the header article sort of compared cap removal to NAT usage.
Not the same thing, one is getting more than you paid for, the other is making it easier to use what you paid for.
As far as AT&T's response, I think from what little information is on the thread that it was overkill. But then I do not know what the full story is (But knowing AT&T and some of the thefts they have done like charging my credit card for two different cell phone turn ons and I do not own a cell phone), I wonder.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| |
See 13 replies to this post | |
 FoBoT8
join:2001-02-15
Liberty, MO |  um, ok
my RR modem is included in my monthly fee, so i think if i modified it, i should get in trouble. but it would be a good idea for AT&T to have a published policy on consequences
if my cable ISP disallowed NAT, i would cancel and go with a technology that allowed it, even if it meant paying more or going back to dial up
i only have one pc connected to my cable modem, i don't believe i am violating anything, what happens to my packets after that isn't their business
--
Fixer Of BrOken Things-
Use the right tool for the right job! | |
| | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: um, ok said by FoBoT:
does the modem belong to the customer or is it rented/leased?
doesnt matter who owns the equipment -- its basically like stealing cable tv -- you may own the tv, but you don't own the service. | |
| | | MowerMan5Premium
join:2001-04-07
Fort Worth, TX | Re: um, ok In the case of cable tv... a person can own their own descrambler box, but if it allows them to see channels they aren't paying for--then the cable company has the right (and the means) to disable their service and/or box.
As much as I feel for this user, he did violate a contract he had with AT&T. He promised to pay a certain amount in exchange for being provided a clearly-outlined service. When he was downloading for those few hours at a much higher speed--he HAD to have known that he was exceeding the speed he was paying for. He didn't immediately call and explain (that might have been received better), he used the "pirated" bandwidth until he was noticed and shut off by AT&T. If everyone did this, then the cable internet providers would surely go out of business! | |
| | | |  Traal
join:2000-10-19
Mesa, AZ
 ·BroadVoice
| Re: um, ok Ironically, the only way to get what you're paying for in terms of bandwidth is just what Myko2K did. How many DSLReports readers, who are paying for 3000/384k (for example), have ever seen speeds equal to (or in excess of) 3000/384k? 95% or even 99% of advertised speed doesn't count.
An ISP's "Terms of Service" agreement should go both ways. The main reason it doesn't for the most part is a lack of competition.
--
/* The green code always compiles. */ | |
| | | | |  IamZedPremium
join:2001-01-10
Dayton, OH | Re: um, ok I hear ya Traal. I get at best half what I pay for. Never more. Right now I tested 756K. That actually rocks for my connection. Road Runner is coming though. Any week now as it’s in my zip code.
--
A thing worth doing is worth doing to excess | |
| | | | | MowerMan5Premium
join:2001-04-07
Fort Worth, TX | said by Traal:
How many DSLReports readers, who are paying for 3000/384k (for example), have ever seen speeds equal to (or in excess of) 3000/384k? 95% or even 99% of advertised speed doesn't count.
As for as DSL customers go, they can't get more than the top of their option level--because it's capped (at the Central Office) at that level. Also, most service providers advertise a "from/to" speed. If a person gets a 1.5/128 DSL, the download speed is guaranteed at 384K--not 1.5M. And the speed they guarantee is the speed from their modem to the equipment in the Central Office--not to a website. | |
|
| |
See 47 replies to this post | |
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | Getting The Message Out Looking at an individual user (who in this case probably had no intent to defraud) makes it harder to see the bigger picture. AT&T has a right to enforce their terms and conditions, and having to build a customer-service infrastructure to keep track of warnings and the like just adds to their costs. And having to research each case to find out what was in the heart of the user is just more time and money down the drain.
But unlike some poor soul who can't get his email working, they would be incurring customer service costs for people trying to cheat the system. Why give them the time of day?
In the short term there might be a few innocent folks caught up in this - as our poor DSLR member was - but AT&T's swift and harsh reaction has made their point: "Do not mess with this". Word will get around, and the problem will end up solving itself for nearly no cost to them. Their goal must be to minimize the cost of doing business, and that means both "bandwidth costs" (by catching the uncappers) and "customer service costs".
By eliminating the troublesome users, those who play by the rules won't be paying for the bad ones.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Security Consultant • Tustin, California USA • »www.unixwiz.net | |
| | nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 Host:
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Re: Getting The Message Out While money wise this approach may be the most cost effective, there is another cost which you fail to take into account. Customer satisfaction.. it's an old and tried truth that best advertising is "word of mouth". Happy customers recommend more customers.. etc.. etc.. You get the point.
By behaving like a greedy, cold blooded corporation AT&T will never bee seen as anything but that.. This policy may save them customer service costs, but in the long run it will hurt them more on the public opinion front than it may be worth.
They proved they can cut a customer off if one breaks the cap, how much more costly is it to issue a warning first?
--
Angels and demons dancing in my head, lunatics and monsters underneath my bed. | |
| | | SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | Re: Getting The Message Out said by nil:
Happy customers recommend more customers.. etc.. etc.. You get the point.
Yes, I do. "Thank God my ISP doesn't allow or waste their time on cheaters, freeloaders and spammers. I love AT&T".
Steve | |
| | | | nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 Host:
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Re: Getting The Message Out said by Steve:
I love AT&T".
It's obvious you never used them 
"Thank God my ISP cracks down on some poor shmuck who got more speed for about 5 minutes while letting my hideous packet loss problem that's lasted months go unattended.."
--
Angels and demons dancing in my head, lunatics and monsters underneath my bed. | |
|
 MPScanPremium
join:2001-08-24
Boston, MA | I just think it's funny.... ... that ATTBI jumped right on top of this guy when they can't get their $hit straight for regular customers. 2 hour told times, waiting days for a tech, getting bounced around, severe outages... but they obviously have the manpower to recognize something like this in 0.02 seconds.
What a shame. | |
| | rgjr
join:2002-03-24
Petaluma, CA | AT&T is the worst customer service company ever. Well, maybe not EVER but they're in the running. I've had cable service since it was available in my area 5 years ago. Since AT&T transitioned over from Excite the quality of service is absolute trash. Not the connection mind you ... the "always on" and bandwidth have always been there for me I test down near my 1500 cap and almost always test a few points above the 128 up cap. Hovever, something about the service is unstable now. I have to cycle my modem 15 to 20 times a week. After months of trying I STILL have not gotten the second IP I've purchased to work. Therefore, I use a router (works better and is the common sense solution anyway. These are only a couple of my MANY customer service issues since AT&T took over from Excite.
Customer service is my main gripe. AT&T does not provide what they say they will provide. It seams to me that they have made a concerted effort to hire level one techs that have absolutely NO experience whatsoever. They then train these people to read from a screen and reply with programmed responses. Keep the customer from going to level 2 or senior support as long as possible and when all else fails blame the problem on the customers hardware/software. AT&T customer service is the biggest joke I've personally seen.
My most recent issue was with the second IP and the need to cycle my modem constantly. I'll not go into detail but the conversation logs I have are complete comedy. I can't believe they actually have the feature that makes it easy for the user to save and print the conversation logs. It would be in thier best interest to disable it.
My opinion on un-capping .... anytime ... ANYTIME you can exact a pound of flesh from a piece of filth like AT&T it's a good thing. Just understand that protecting thier mighty dollar is exactly where they will focus thier resources. You will get caught and you may lose service. Don't really see the need for a warning.
I just don't get how any company can sell service and not really provide what the customer is paying for. Nothing can or ever will be done about it. Prepare for things to only get worse ... not better. | |
|
 NOVA_GuyObamaCare Kills AmericansPremium
join:2002-03-05 | Black and white? No-- it's all gray... As with many other things in life, I do not feel that this is a simple black-and-white issue. There are many, many gray areas...
If they've rented the cable modem, then I believe they definitely should be in trouble for uncapping it. An act like this should come with a stern warning the first time around, and then a 6 month "probationary" period in which that particular user is placed on a "watch list" for trouble. One more violation-- like hacking, uncapping, etc.-- would then be grounds for terminating service immediately (and permanently, if the ISP so decides).
The gray area is when they've bought their own modem. All that's necessary is a software configuration change, and technically you're only modifying your own equipment.
The debate then proceeds to another level-- which goes to why AUPs were created in the first place (to ensure that everyone has a pleasant experience with the service). If they haven't hurt everyone else's service, then it's not severe and a configuration change could be made to the modem quietly by the cable company to "correct" it. In this case, I don't really see what the problem is. Why should the company enforce the policy for the sake of enforcing it? Now, if they've affected service to others, then throw the book at them as I've suggested above.
As for P2P apps and home networking with NAT... Well, ISPs may be able to shut people down for running P2P applications. And they may get around to doing it some day here in the US. But I don't think that they will ever have the capability to prevent people from putting their own network together for net access, so they may as well never even try to enforce that clause.
--
"Objects in the rear view mirror may appear closer than they are." - Meat Loaf, Bat out of Hell II | |
|  RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | Sorry, But.... I think that expecting AT&T or any other provider to spell out the consequences of this, or basically any other action for that matter would be like expecting your local
Kmart to announce in between their blue light specials..
that by the way..anyone caught stealing is going to get 10 years in jail!!
I mean...C'mon now!!
I think something like this clearly crosses the line and
it's hard to see how someone wouldn't know what they were doing in attempting to do this.
If you read this persons thread, he states in his first couple of posts that he clearly knew what he was doing
and took responsibility for it.
About midstream, he changed his tune..blaming it on
"some file he got from IRC".
Well..he changed his tune after someone suggested that
as a way out is what really happened.
With all that said, I think the penalty is excessive.
The analogy of getting a speeding ticket or breaking the law in some other manner, paying a fine or some other penalty is a good one.
But, maybe from AT&T's perspective, he did get off light.
Their view of these kinds of things obviously is that it is theft of service. And that is a crime.
To them, HARSH..may have been having him prosecuted...not
just having his service cut off.
And, as others have said above, would a store want a person
back in again who was stealing from them in the past?
No, they wouldn't.
To them...just saying stay out from now on..and not prosecuting would be a light penalty in their minds.
I also want to say that over the last few months, I have
seen on these boards more and more discussion about
uncapping..and people asking how to do it.
This obviously is being viewed like other things on the net..file sharing, running servers etc. and impressionable
young people, (and maybe some old ones as well) simply are not considering the consequences..or how easily they can
be caught for something like this.
It's not hard to see why AT&T or any other ISP may want to set an example here. If the penalty were simply a slap on the hand, they would have a huge problem on their hands in
others trying it too.
I think the person who this happened to should have his
service restored..but with an appropriate fine or
perhaps a couple months of downtime. He did admit it in his
first couple of posts and took responsibility for it.
I hope he goes back to that stance, and AT&T also
bends a little on their end.
That would be a fair outcome for this.
And, let others be warned here by what happened to him...
this is the outcome of it.
They caught him in SIX hours.
~RRR | |
| | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Sorry, But.... said by RoadRunner Rick:
I think the person who this happened to should have his
service restored..but with an appropriate fine or
perhaps a couple months of downtime. He did admit it in his
first couple of posts and took responsibility for it.
I hope he goes back to that stance, and AT&T also
bends a little on their end.
That would be a fair outcome for this.
And, let others be warned here by what happened to him...
this is the outcome of it.
They caught him in SIX hours.
~RRR
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.. however, if they went around restoring everyones service after they stole from them, what would stop others from doing it? After all, most of us that have attbi complain about something or other, and its people like this that cause problems for the rest of us... sure there service may be expceptional -- but what about the rest of us? Someone said before that cable modems can get speeds of like 30mbps .. who knows how fast this guy was going. Fair to me is justice for the rest of us that have done nothing wrong. Just like kids that act up in school - send them to the pricipals office - or send them home. | |
| | | RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | Re: Sorry, But.... said by titaniumTM:
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.. however, if they went around restoring everyones service after they stole from them, what would stop others from doing it?
You raise a very good point, and it is one I thought quite a bit about.
As I noted in my post, if this were simply some little slap on the wrist..they're going to have a big problem on their hands.
So there SHOULD be a price to be paid.
And, I did suggest a price. A couple months of downtime
and a fine is, IMO..a fair and sufficient first warning.
It's not just saying ok..we'll restore your service tomorrow..no problem. But, it's also not saying we're going to cut you off forever for a first offense at something either.
I mean, heck..if that were the case..just give everyone life in prison for anything they ever do wrong. 
I also think they've accomplished something else here.
They've shown how quickly and easily they DO know about something like this.
His post says it took them Six hours to catch him.
This just isn't something to be even attempted.
Lastly, why do I think he should be given a second chance
after an appropriate fine/downtime?
Because in his first couple of posts..he did fully admit what he did..and took responsibility for it.
And secondly, I think some of these forums..even here on DSLR are giving young people some wrong ideas.
I've noticed the RoadRunner forum the last couple months
with Many more questions about this..and whether it can be done. People are just not viewing this as illegal.
In some respects..it's being presented as just the latest thing to try..like any other tweak.
In light of that..I think a second chance deserves to be given, but again..with an appropriate warning.
Permanent disconnection for this is just too harsh a penalty IMO. | |
| | | | titaniumTitanium
join:2000-05-25
West Richland, WA | Re: Sorry, But.... I just think the way I do because I know if I were to get caught uncapping my modem I would try EVERY trick in the book to get some sympathy from the company in order to get my service restored.... | |
| | | | | | | Re: Sorry, But.... said by titaniumTM:
I just think the way I do because I know if I were to get caught uncapping my modem I would try EVERY trick in the book to get some sympathy from the company in order to get my service restored....
And if ATT weren't the only game in town, they'd be wise to do so (perhaps if a fine is paid, I'm not defending uncapping modems).
They are not exactly creating any customer goodwill like this, and when competition comes to town, people tend to remember how they, their friends and neighbors were treated.
--
"Outlook not good" - that magic eightball knows everything. I'll ask about IE next... | |
|
|  keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | detection apprehension and punishment I suspect that the long suspensions are due to the legal problems of showing a court that uncapping is theft of service. It could be done but would take time, and time is money. So the ISP spends $2,000 prosecuting someone and they do 20 hours of community service – who was really penalized.
So criminal prosecution is probably be a last resort.
Also suing for disruption to other subscribers’ services would be difficult. It would be necessary to document the value of the service disruption.
On the other hand, suspending service is easy. And if the customer wants to fight it, the onus is on the customer to launch the court action and prove that the ISP's action was unreasonable.
That said, I think a 1-month and 3-month suspension of service is reasonable for a first and second offenses. But if more resources are going into detection, and the greater the disruption caused is greater than I think, longer suspensions would make sense.
Detection, apprehension and punishment are valid parts of a security system. We shouldn't be complaining that prevention doesn't always work.
Look at the physical world. After 80 years of development an automotive hacker can still use security vulnerabilities in your car to break the windshield or steal the entire vehicle. After 3000 years of development we still don’t have cracker-proof physical locks on our homes.
Security systems try to prevent loss, but when loss happens we depend on detection, apprehension and punishment. | |
|
| | Uncapping & Charter Charter is going after those who are uncapping their modems. This past week Charter shutdown or limited service to uncappers in Walla Walla, WA. It has gone on in other areas. Some have been banned, others has gone done to a tier of 256k down. | |
| | | Define speed and uncapping | |
| | | | Re: Define speed and uncapping Adelphia provides me usually 15k to 45K instead of 150K promised and the upload speed is just total bs. (in LA area)
Uncapping will work only if you get the full promised speed in the first place. But that never ever happens. Adelphia is the worst EVER provider. | |
|
 WildGodGod Is DeadPremium
join:2002-01-30
NYC | A little too harsh. Give the guy a warning and thats it.
The guy didnt commit murder. He d/l stuff a little faster for a cple of hours.
If he does it again then cut him off. Think about it, we let murderers and rapists get another chance. Your gonna ban this guy for life? A little harsh if you ask me.
Besides how would you feel if one day you got a call telling you your service is terminated because you were using Kazaa?
--
AOL DSL SUCKS / REMOVE SENATOR FRITZ HOLLINGS FROM OFFICE | |
| | | | Re: A little too harsh. said by wildxgod:
Think about it, we let murderers and rapists get another chance.
no, we don't. and if we did, would that make it ok?
--
ian
| |
| | | WildGodGod Is DeadPremium
join:2002-01-30
NYC
| Re: A little too harsh. we dont? lol
what country do u live in?
murderers and rapists get out of jail left and right. its called parole.i do not in any way agree with that they should be let out on parole.
my point was to ban someone for life is pretty harsh compared to the "crime" this kid committed. the kid didnt kill anyone, he made a bad judgement, he got caught. give the kid a warning and put him on a watchlist.
Arent the ISP's robbing customer's as well? My dsl service is capped at 768, im lucky if i get 540 yet many people get close to the cap. Am I not paying the same price as these people? Why should I pay the same if I get less?
--
AOL DSL SUCKS / REMOVE SENATOR FRITZ HOLLINGS FROM OFFICE
[text was edited by author 2002-04-29 14:03:44]
[text was edited by author 2002-04-29 14:10:36] | |
|
| keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | In 2 or 3 months, if the thief phones up ATTBI, asks for an appointment with a customer service manager, gets dressed up neatly, goes down, asks nicely and promises not to do it again, they'll probably let him have his service back.
Or the thief could go to whatever public utilities board is in his area and complain that the penalty was too harsh.
But I'm sure the ISP will be only too happy to take his $60/month. Especially since cable modem companies are beginning to do things like retransmit the configurations to cable modems every hour. They might even have a new password protected modem they can rent him.
ATTBI has a lot of scriptkiddies on it. I get scanned from there a lot and the scriptkiddies stay active on an IP address a long time (i.e. they aren't shut down within a week of being reported like a good ISP would do). I'm surprised ATTBI even has a security department. | |
|
looser
join:2001-02-04
La Mesa, CA | Turn the other way ? Someone made the comment that ATT dont mind the PtP thing, and ATT looks the other way which is against the rules, but this one guy out of ten's of thousand's of subscribers uncapps one time and he's outta here (Pete Rose stuff).
Whats funny here is if ATT kicked all the PtP bandwith sucker's, they would have a 10th of the subscribe base.
I guess what I am saying is RULES are RULES ! So be fare and apply them ATT, and kick all the PtP users, and set some real example your corporate moron's. | |
| | keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | Re: Turn the other way ? A lot fewer than 90% of broadband customers run P2P -- like maybe it is 10%.
ISPs are concerned with what disrupts service. Sharing a few files and uploading a gig or two a month is apparently okay. Here 5GB is the acceptable limit.
This capping is largely ISPs way of controlling P2P and porn addicts from disrupting less demanding customers. If P2P applications had internal throttles, and if hackers would leave them in place, it wouldn't have been necessary.
If you read the financial pages, ISPs are trying move to charging for bands of service.
In other words, if you put a heavy load on their system, and they have to put you on your own loop, they'll charge a premium.
Or if you want to upload and download a lot, but are happy with 128kbps cause you aren't going to be sitting their watching anyway (it's Kazaa not RealPlayer), you're going to schedule it and go to sleep, you'll get a price break. | |
|
IamZedPremium
join:2001-01-10
Dayton, OH | Come on Some people sound like they think AT&T replaced all @home’s 3Meg capable hardware or something. Going from 3 down to a 1.5 cap and then accusing this kid of ripping off your service is like complaining to the burglar as he walks out the door that your loosing heat.
--
A thing worth doing is worth doing to excess | |
| |  INHCNN
join:2001-12-15
Lansing, MI | Profit at all costs Ahh... the explaination has already been revealed: Here's how:
1. Sure, AT&T blasts this guy off the network because he took more that he was 'paying for'. Which means less bandwidth for other users, and less users per segment, less profit per dollar spent.
2. P2P - I would guess that %85 of AT&T customers purchased this service to download MP3's, AVI's, EXE's, MPG's, ZIP's, etc.. faster. Why does AT&T care? So long as people are ordering thier service, AT&T doesn't care who else is claiming that they are loosing money (RIAA).
3. The CrAP. (Crappy reduced Access Procedure) This is a dead horse, I know, but it just goes to show how full circle this all is. Less speed per user = more users per segment = more profit for the mothership (err... DeathStar).
It's all about a profit to AT&T. They care not the value of the service that they deliver - just so long as it's enough to keep us quiet and to make the highest revenue.
In reality, companies like AT&T are here as a service to us, not to serve as a dictatorship. "Our way or no way" isn't how it should be. We should have a choice. At the VERY LEAST offer a teared package so that I HAVE A CHOICE to get RIPPED OFF even FURTHER if I so CHOOSE.
Wake up America - we're sacrificing value of service to Corporate America for no reason other than because we don't have a choice.
But we do - somehow, someway - we can overvcome.
Power of numbers.
Power of money.
Power of speech.
Power of freedom.
-T
--
Random Thoughts, by Jack Handy. | |
| | | | | Re: Profit at all costs Agreed.
I am going to cancel my ATT service in June with the message of:
"I do not agree with your terms of service. I do not agree with your speed caps. Please disconnect me post-haste, as your service is not valuable to me"
Of course the significance of these statements will be lost on the ATT phone-drone, but I am sure they have to log this somewhere, and if enough users will do this...
They don't always charge for installation...you could always order it back up in 6 months....think about it...
Who is with me? | |
|
|  Pz_
join:2001-03-31
Brownsburg, IN | Re: Come on I tend to look at this the same way I do the RIAA deal. If they wouldn't have been ripping people off to begin with, then there would be less motivation to do the same.
You ever steal a bag of potato chips from Subway? I haven't. Even though they are right out there, easy to get, no one is looking. I'm sure there are people that do , but I think most don't. I don't FEEL like they are ripping me off. Its a fair price for what you get. Since I don't feel like they are robbing me or forcing me to buy their food, I have a better feeling toward the company over all. (either buying their food or starving to death) I chose to go in there because I wanted to, not because it was my only option. So if there were two CEO's hanging off a cliff, one from Subway and one from Comcast. If you were only strong enough to pick up one...which one would it be?
I remember a few years ago getting around 4.5/768, then it was 3.5/256. Now its 1.5/128 all for the same great price. I'm not saying that stealing it right, and I would never uncap my service. But I do understand why someone would. It isn't about making a profit, because it seems to me that every other company out there can turn a profit without pissing everyone off. Why is it that DSL/Cable and RIAA seem to be the only ones that feel that have to keep offering less for more money. | |
| | INHCNN
join:2001-12-15
Lansing, MI | Easy answer -
GREED
Agreed? lol.
-T
--
Random Thoughts, by Jack Handy. | |
|
| | Let's make it easy NAT doesn't cost them much as far as bandwidth is concerned. It's small potatoes. Therefore, it's not as big a concern.
Un-capping, on the other hand, costs them much more. If you're paying for 1500/256, and you're getting 3-4 times that amount, your usage is equal to 3 or 4 people. And they're only collecting money from 1 person for that bandwidth (you).
It's all about what's the biggest eyesore.
It's all about what hurts them the most.
I'm all for getting more bang for my buck. I hate the fact that they can't promise you the bandwidth they advertise. If I am paying $40/mo for 1500mbs, and I routinely get 750mbs, they are in a way, stealing $20/mo from me.
But I can't justify un-capping. That crosses the line. | |
| | jacourPremium
join:2001-12-11
Matthews, NC Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·SureWest Cable
 ·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Let's make it easy Does uncapping really cost them more? I suppose some users will abuse anything but I have a certain amount of work to get done every day, there are a certain number of downloads I do, and there are a certain number of e-mails I get. Does it matter how fast those come down the pipe since the quantity is relatively fixed?
I don't think so. Now, if everybody wanted to access the cable at the exact same moment they would have to increase capacity, but Internet traffic is very "bursty" so I fail to see the difference (to AT&T) between three minutes of download at 1.5MB and 90 seconds download at 3MB. Again, this assumes I am not running a big server, or sharing the entire recorded history of music on Kazaa - neither of which I do.
NAT is a different issue, I don't think AT&T can come after anybody for that since they specifically permit it. This quote is from the AT&T Security Web Page "Commonly Asked Questions":
"Can I use a router or other networking device to share my AT&T Broadband connection?
Yes. However, AT&T Broadband will not provide support for your connection while it is connected to a LAN or unsupported device. In addition, you will need to take appropriate security measures to ensure that your network is secure." | |
|
| | Interesting.. Since ATT in the first place lowered the caps taking (*stealing is a little harsh) what was originally our bandwith without any consent, I side with the guy even though he did break the ToS. BTW, the guy whose account was g-lined, just change the name of your config file to abuse.bin and you should be back to normal | |
| |  StonehawkStay Low And Let It BlowPremium
join:2001-05-17
Deerfield, WI
kudos:1 | Re: Interesting.. you misunderstand the paying for a service thing a little I think...
The bandwidth was never "yours". You may have had higher bandwidth caps before. ATT reserves the right to lower those caps (or raise them) at their discretion. Your response to that is to accept that or vote with your money and walk. If you dont want to lose your broadband, youa re basically screwed. Deal with it. Happens all the time.
At no time however, was the bandwdith yours. You are merely renting a certain portion from ATT for your residential use. They can choose to "raise the rent" (ie raise the price, or lower the bandwidth caps) at their discretion. You have no say so in this matter.
Stay safe all....
--
Put the wet stuff on the hot stuff | |
| | keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | If they drop the cap below what was advertised, you can contact the BBB, take them to small claims court, or complain to your government consumer protection agency.
Courts have tossed out the claim by ISPs that so long as one customer is getting the advertised speed their claims of speeds of "up to" are valid. The speeds of "up to" have to be available to all customers or it is false advertising. The "up to" applies to customers who don't have sufficiently powerful equipment or who are visiting slow sites. Clearly those are circumstances beyond an ISP's control.
That the ISP had capacity beyond what was advertised and are taking it away is fine. In fact, it is good because it will help the ISP meet their advertised claims for more customers. | |
|
 zoom3148SupermanPremium
join:2001-04-30
Yermo, CA |  What about Uncapping as Needed?
| |
| |
See 15 replies to this post | |
| | What are you all complaining about? Have any of you read your TOS? I bet not a single ISP promises you'll achieve your max speed, but every one of them says they reserve the right to disconnect you if you violate the TOS.
If you bump into someone at the mall do you complain when your not thrown in jail for assault?
So your running a p2p and your ISP doesn't allow it, you can either continue and hope you still have a connection in the morning, your can call and ask if it's ok, or you can stop and you won't have to worry about it. It's that simple. | |
| |  palmer_j_rCongenital OptimistPremium
join:2000-06-08
Chicago, IL |  Re: What are you all complaining about?
I agree with you 100%, unfortunately, people still want to whine, steal, cheat and bend the rules just for them. I'm an RCN customer in Chicago with a speed of about 800kbps down and 128-250kbps up.
Instead of worrying about being capped, I'd worry more about maintaining a *STABLE* speed on the net as a whole (yeah right). As it stands when I log into EQ (everquest) the speed jumps around anywhere from 0-1630kbps+
~j~
--
Joey
www.jpenterprisescomputing.com
email: webmaster@jpenterprisescomputing.com | |
| | keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | Kaiserj, ISPs who advertise a speed but do not have the equipment that can deliver it in all of the areas they both advertise in and deliver service to have been successfully sued in small claims courts.
The law means what the judge says it does on the day he rules. Small claims court judges have ruled ... against ISPs and ruled that ISPs are in fact making promises.
You have to show that it is the ISPs equipment and lines, and not your computer's shortcomings, or the shortcomings of the server at the sites you are visiting. So you get a few neighbours together, run some tests, and document them.
Courts have rejected that the idea presented by some ISPs that "so long as one customer some place in the network is receiving the advertised speed they haven't lied".
All customers have to be able to receive up to the advertised speed. Deficiencies in the customer's equipment and the server at the other end being outside of the ISP's control are valid excuses for an ISP. So if you have a P133 and you don't receive the advertised speed you need to borrow a P4 for your tests.
The courts do work, but you have to make the effort and present a case. | |
| | | | I think it comes down to this ,Peeps are used to getting past everything on the net as far as getting everything for free , be it warez, mp3 etc.So they get into this pattern that if it can be done , it will and they have no right to tell me that im wrong, stealing ,etc.Bandwith theft is not warez.They will deal with the people that break the contract.Everyone knows that its illegal, so why cry about something that they know will happen??
I dunno, thats my 2 cents worth | |
|
 SandSharkLong may you runPremium,MVM
join:2000-05-23
Santa Fe, TX
kudos:3 | And what do the neighbors think?
Not only was this kid robbing bandwidth from AT&T, he was robbing bandwidth from his neighbors. I wonder what they think.
--
"186,000 miles a second, it's not just a good idea...it's the law." | |
| | IamZedPremium
join:2001-01-10
Dayton, OH | Re: And what do the neighbors think? They are running on an old 3Meg per user @home pipe. This kid could max his switch allotment and the people that shared that switch would get the full 1.5Meg they were descended to.
He cannot overburden that equipment so as to limit his neighbor’s allotment. He can only cost AT&T a literal few cents more for total bandwidth consumed for that region by accelerating from that 1.5Meg he was getting to a screaming 2Meg for 6 hours. Whoopee.
A lot of people posting in this subject seem to concern themselves with whether what this kid did was right or wrong. To an almost Biblical level. I believe what his ISP did was wrong, from a business point of view, and not the Good Book
They might have sucked many faithful years of income from this family with a smidgen of understanding of even the most butt stupid way to treat a client.
Not in the examination of every single infraction, I know they can’t afford that. But they could have recapped him and kept a note of that. Someone that repeatedly needs recapping is deliberately trying to violate his TOS.
--
A thing worth doing is worth doing to excess | |
| | | SandSharkLong may you runPremium,MVM
join:2000-05-23
Santa Fe, TX
kudos:3 | Well, it depends on what you definition... It's unbelievable that you and others are trying to make AT&T look like the bad guys. It reminds me of the burglar turning around and suing the guy he just robbed for hurting his back because the bag he was carrying the silverware and electronics in was too heavy.
It was interesting to read your earlier post regarding your theft of cable. Up until you were caught, did you have any intention of ever stopping stealing it? If I understand what you're saying, it's okay as long as you don't get caught, but when you are caught the "victim" doesn't deserve any recourse? Sounds like a good deal for the perpetrator.
I tried really hard to keep an open mind while reading all the threads to the original post. I really did. The whole time I kept being reminded of Bill Clinton and the infamous quote, "well, it depends on what your definition of is is." I suppose, in this case, it depends on what you definition of stealing is.
Now, as far as Myko2K is concerned. After reading his posts, I have empathy for the young man. I'm sure this is one lesson he'll never forget and I'm sure his old man made sure he'll never forget it. Actually, by posting his story, he's done a great service for AT&T. If AT&T wanted to cut him some slack, they'd do wonders for their public relations, but I highly doubt they will. I think they believe it would be a sign of weakness on their part and would leave the door open for future abuses. I think he'd better start getting used to dial-up.
--
"186,000 miles a second, it's not just a good idea...it's the law." | |
|
| IamZedPremium
join:2001-01-10
Dayton, OH | They would be better served by turning him into a life long customer. The cable company has made about $9,000 from me as a customer in the last 20 years that they would not have had they been business idiots instead of business men.
--
A thing worth doing is worth doing to excess | |
|
 WxULM
join:2001-01-12
New Ulm, MN | No Punishment for Cox.net uncapping If one owns their OWN PERSONAL cable modem, and is NOT GUARANTEED any up/down speeds whatsoever from the CISP, and you do NOT set up a FTP site and start serving files (against most AUP), is there anything illegal, about "uncapping" your personal property?
Once again...
All bandwidth really is is the size of the pipe you are using to surf the 'net. Who here hasn't adjusted their RWIN #s, etc. to make their computer accept a bigger pipe. That is not illegal. Since most CISP DO NOT publish and guarantee up/down speeds, is there anything wrong with adjusting (uncapping or whatever) a cable modem that you own if it is NOT against your AUP, especially since the CISP makes NO GUARANTEE of the size of the pipe they provide?
Most of us work to tweak our technology to get the best possible use out of it. How is uncapping your own personal property in a cable modem any different. Until the CISP publish and guarantee specific speeds, then how can uncapping your cable modem be illegal? "Hogging bandwidth" is to vague to be a standard.
I am arguing here that there can be nothing illegal about uncapping your own personal cable modem if there is no standard guaranteed by the CISP. As long as you don't start serving files, and as long as your CISP does not put in writing what the Maximum up/down speeds you are paying for (i.e., $0.07 a minute long distance; 100 digital T.V. channels for $29/month; VERSES $34.95/month for "high speed" Internet Q:'How high is the maximum speed I am paying for?' A:'Its actually not guaranteed and there is no currently listed speeds')
Read the fine print on your AUP and TOS. With @Home/Cox.net, there is NO MENTION that doing this will break their AUP.
Check it out for yourself.
After spending an hour or so going through both the Subscriber Agreement and the Acceptable Use Policy for Cox HSI, I only found two areas that might address the issue of uncapping your own personal cable modem.
I also found one Q/A @ Cox.com regarding the fact that the 1% who are abusing the network are doing it by using a disproportionate share of network resources (in ways that were not intended to be supported by the current network architecture, or that are not residential use), which in turn can cause poor performance for all others in all situations including common Web browsing.
In reading this further, the examples given are:
1. Running a server (Against the AUP)
2. Sending large email files while simultaneously browsing web pages (More business-like than residential-like)
3. Simultaneously using multiple computers in a 'heavy' manner through a single cable modem.
No mention whatsoever of "uncapping" your modem as being an illegal activity let alone against the AUP or Subscriber Agreement.
Cox states that to remedy the above situations:
1. The network is not set up for personal servers and setting one up is against their AUP.
2. Look into subscribing to a business account if you are uploading/downloading large files like a business might.
3. Multiple computer use through a single modem may not support specific types of 'heavy' use such as multiplayer gaming, transfer of large files including emails that are well above the average 30 KB size while simultaneously downloading, or multiple users requesting and/or sending lots of information simultaneously.
All in all, I found Cox.net's policies to be rather lax when it came to uncapping your own modem, if one even exists at all.
It does seem that they are more worried about the abuse of upload speeds than down.
I did find where it stated that if one uses excessive bandwidth (or any bandwidth for that matter), one must ensure that ones activities do not improperly restrict, inhibit, or degrade any other user's use of the Services, nor represent (in the sole judgment of CoxCom) an unusually large burden on the network itself.
Note that CoxCom may terminate, suspend, or require a Customer to upgrade its Services and pay additional fees if CoxCom, in its sole discretion, determines that a CoxCom Customer is using excessive bandwidth. What bothers me is that "excessive bandwidth" is not specifically defined in terms of real Kbps numbers. In theory, Cox could cut off your service at any point in time the way their current AUP is written, whether uncapping is involved or not!
No mention of "lawsuits" and "criminal prosecution". The way it is written, it gives the appearance that if/when you use excessive bandwidth (in Cox HSI judgment) as long as it does not interfere with other users -- No problem. If it does, then the CoxCom customer must either pay more, or stop conducting activities that do interfere with others.
Anyway, the only metion of criminal prosecution I see comes from you doing damage to their network. "You will be subject to liability for damages and/or criminal prosecution."
To show you how outdated their AUP/Subscriber agreement are, they explicitly state that you may not run multiple computers from your one cable modem -- yet on the cox.com website, they go into great detail on how to set up a home network, even stating that, "If the connection is through a cable modem, the advantage in sharing is even better (there is actually enough bandwidth to share!)."
Go figure. | |
| | | | Re: No Punishment for Cox.net uncapping Haha... I uncapped...and i am banned form attbi.. .its alright ill get back at em someday... lmao... ill do it again... i don't mind the punishments... Hey you only live once and live it to the fullest... dont be a dang chicken. | |
| | | amarkowsSystem Failure
join:2001-05-18
Copiague, NY | Re: No Punishment for Cox.net uncapping LOL, so how does 56K fill now | |
| | | | | | Re: No Punishment for Cox.net uncapping Hey, way to be man, I have respect for ya even if you did get caught... Hopefully you can get back on ATTBI and have some fun...But anyways about uncapping, most of those who are uncapped are morons that either 1) Leave Kazaa or P2P apps on all day allowing stuff to go out 1GB/day or 2) download insane amounts of material...If your uncapped, be smart about it and keep a low profile..Hey you may get caught or you may not, thats half the fun | |
|
|  whizkid3Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY
kudos:8 | WXoKC,
I totally agree. In checking OOL's documents, TOS, etc.; I cam to the same conclusion.
Not illegal (theft of service).
There is NO valid contract.
(Of course, just as you are free to uncap; they are free to cap your ass down to zero.) See my explanation here:
»It's clearly Theft of Service | |
|
| |
|
It's clearly Theft of Service
