MemphisPCGuy
Senior Systems Engineer
Premium
join:2004-05-09
Memphis, TN
 ·Comcast
| reply to King Duck
Re: [Connectivity] Contacted by Comcast Abuse Dept Today...
Could it be that being vague allows them to turn a blind eye to the actual content of your overage as opposed to just a number? Certainly they can tell what you are downloading if they wanted too ... at that point all it would take would be one copyright infringement to violate you and the AUP. Perhaps the way it is being handled is the best way from a legal standpoint for them ?
--
»www.memphispcguy.com |
|
Anonymous1972
@vanguardms.com
 from:
dot_null 
thumbs down from:
Cabal
ColorBASIC
ptrowski
| reply to IcePirate123
Don't worry bud. The number of former comcast subscribers that have been booted off is growing and a class-action suit is slowly starting to take form.
Comcast won't be able to continue to hide under their one-sided contract for much longer. |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| reply to King Duck
said by King Duck : they are in the abuse department, At the risk of possibly being a tad Pythonesque, this probably explains why they are so abusive...... But not all customers are abusing the service.
--
YourIP.US - It's Your IP .. and more!
rr.cx - Personal Site.. coming soon. |
|
Anonymous1972
@vanguardms.com
from:
deblin
thumbs down from:
Cabal
ColorBASIC
| reply to ColorBASIC
The reason why Comcast does not follow the same nor posts the limitations of their service unlike Cox Communications does is because they are using outdated, bad equipment AND they do not implement QOS while Cox does.
If Comcast did implement QOS in their network the first thing that would be compromised is the bullshit "POWERBOOST" feature. They simply want to be the fastest HSI provider. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to CableTool
said by CableTool :The contract is not vague. Its at their discretion. The limits are different from area to area, node to node depending on penetration. JT uses the word Draconian too much and its annoying. These threads always get locked to its futile to actually discuss the issue. No one here runs their own ISP so their "point of view" is pretty damn limited. etc etc etc.  And why do these threads get locked?
Simple. It always turns into 2 camps.
The first camp are the Comcast apologists. They say various things including, "those are the rules, there are no 'hard' caps, it's in the AUP, take it or leave it, etc." Other than vague explanations on how things work, they really offer no insight or true help and take ANY criticism of the abuse policy as a personal affront to them.
The second camp are the customers and consumer advocates. Most want an accurate accounting of how much is too much and at least some form of open communication (not vague statements like "use less.") There are even some who want even more (like unlimited data.) It boils down to wanting the information to make an informed decision.
If people are sick of the issue, then don't say anything. It seems both sides have their extremist moths who are drawn into the thread flame. The best way for something to go away is to ignore it. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to King Duck
said by King Duck : they are in the abuse department, At the risk of possibly being a tad Pythonesque, this probably explains why they are so abusive...... Comcast Ministry of Abuse......down the hall from the Comcast Ministry of "We're a BMW" Propaganda.  |
|
brianj6
join:2007-06-05
Atlanta, GA
| reply to TigerLord
said by TigerLord : To play the devil's advocate, you also cannot be too angry at the representatives. From what I have read and seen, also from people who worked in those centers, they get yelled at all day by more than clueless people, and sometimes the reps themselves are clueless and uneducated about the technology and service they are giving support for. They are given a script, which most of the time will suffice to answer I would say 90% of the calls they receive. I agree. The call rep is following a process set in place by management. Thus, it is what it is for now. While I'm sure my voice was raised by the end of the first call I had with the Abuse Dept, I don't believe I was yelling. Of course, from the reps perspective that may not have been the case. The second rep I spoke with and I had a very good conversation.
For everyone; I had reviewed all the other threads dealing with this issue and even debated posting anything given it most likely would set off another debate about issues that won't be resolved here. In the end the point of me posting this info was to share how someone facing a similar situation, given I don't foresee Comcast changing their process any time soon, a possible way of reaching a positive resolution. Sure, I got to vent a bit as well in the telling of my experience, but I hope the ending is such that Comcast's AUP is satisfied by my removal of TVTonic and I maintain my Cable service which has served me with only the occasional issue over the past 5+ years. |
|
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
3 edits | reply to Anonymous1972
said by Anonymous1972 :
The reason why Comcast does not follow the same nor posts the limitations of their service unlike Cox Communications does is because they are using outdated, bad equipment AND they do not implement QOS while Cox does.
If Comcast did implement QOS in their network the first thing that would be compromised is the bullshit "POWERBOOST" feature. They simply want to be the fastest HSI provider.
Cox also has Powerboost.
»Cox Customers Get Powerboost
»Cox Expands Powerboost Availability
»Cox Customers Seeing 'Permaboost' (TM)
Both Cox and Comcast use Camiant
--
Macintosh Users Group Serving the Inland Empire |
|
Alphasee
@comcast.net
| reply to TOPDAWG
Your thought is invalid.
Just because there are no speed limit signs, and you're in the united states, there are a few generic laws you should know, and have to know in order to get your license.
1) Residential Areas are 25 mph unless otherwise marked
2) Drive Safe
They both apply to the situation about bandwidth. You use too much bandwidth, you download a bunch of copyrighted material, you are not "driving safe", and you're not following the laws that just simply make sense. |
|
Alphasee
@comcast.net | reply to IcePirate123
Two things...
When you sign up for Comcast service, you agree to their ToS, which states you can't sue them....
and Two, there's no outsourcing to India or Egypt. There just happens to be a lot of those people on the East Coast. |
|
jeffhambone
Peace, through superior firepower
join:2002-02-02
Manassas, VA
·Comcast
| reply to Rob
said by Rob :(snip) It's not a fair game. Comcast can't have their cake and eat it too. Eventually they'll mess with the wrong subscriber who will make a big stink about it and will force Comcast to reevaluate their abuse department and procedures. They may already have:
»comcastissue.blogspot.com/
--
Son, there's only one thing you need to know: HEMI |
|
Anonymous1972
@vanguardms.com
from:
dot_null
| reply to ColorBASIC
Then why won't Comcast post the limitations of their service while cox does? |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| said by Anonymous1972 :
Then why won't Comcast post the limitations of their service while cox does?
Because knocking off people who download 500+ GB *AND* are degrading their node is >>>> forcing everyone to 40 GB a month like Cox. Next?
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
1 edit | said by Cabal :said by Anonymous1972 :
Then why won't Comcast post the limitations of their service while cox does?
Because knocking off people who download 500+ GB *AND* are degrading their node is >>>> forcing everyone to 40 GB a month like Cox. Next? Read my post »Re: [Connectivity] Contacted by Comcast Abuse Dept Today... .
Cox doesn't "force everyone to 40GB per month", never has. They selectively enforce it. When the occasion comes and they need to send out a nastygram, they can point to the caps so that there is no confusion as to what the customer needs to do to stay a customer. Meanwhile I know tons of people in Cox OC who routinely exceed Cox's stated caps and never hear a peep from them.
--
Macintosh Users Group Serving the Inland Empire |
|
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| reply to Alphasee
said by Alphasee :
Two things...
When you sign up for Comcast service, you agree to their ToS, which states you can't sue them....
Actually that won't matter much. Term the service and they're no longer a customer and not bound by Comcast's (your) ToS. Sorry about that.
Besides you can file suit at any time against anyone regardless of such supposed "protections" which allow our lovely corporations to do whatever they want without fear of being sued. The real question is if it would be tossed out of court.
These fellows on the Abuse Dept act the way they do because to them you're the scum that needs to be eliminated. That's about the extent of it. You're a violator so you get what you get.
However, really if Comcast really wants a solution then implementing something where the customer can confirm usage is the way to go. It is clear that they're not interested in this solution, or in actually capping usage at some pre-determined amount. Nor do they wish to create those caps market to market.
Not saying that any of this is a simple solution, but it would be a solution if they had any intention of helping the customer "understand" what they're saying.
This isn't a Comcast issue at all really but rather an ISP issue overall. And yes, my view does matter even if I don't run my own ISP. Sorry 'bout that too.
And one last thing from the OP. In most/many states they cannot record the conversation without disclosing that they are doing so. If they are, then it must be disclosed. Stating that they won't tell you is improper and likely illegal as well.
K.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Angus the IT Chap |
|
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| said by GlobalMind : And yes, my view does matter even if I don't run my own ISP. Sorry 'bout that too. No need to apologize, the phrase was "point of view is limited" not unintitled. 
--
CableFAQ.org/Technicians Unplugged
|
|
Anonymous1972
@vanguardms.com
from:
dot_null
| reply to Cabal
I'd rather know the limitations than not knowing if I'm going to cross some unknown line defined by a company that refuses to tell me. |
|
juniorx
join:2006-02-05
St John'S, NL | In Canada we're cap @ 100GB per month and all p2p applications, ftp and secure cnnections are throttled. I got a feeling if you people keep complaining about not knowing the cap, their going to do the samething they did in Canada |
|
Anonymous1972
@vanguardms.com
| reply to ColorBASIC
Thank you. I was a Cox subscriber for 7 years and NEVER had a problem. Comcast however, after 7 months I (and hundreds if not thousands of others) get the boot and it was the same scripted, word-for-word story as the user that started this new thread. |
|
