N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @02:51PM
| ISPs Have Right to Enforce Terms of Service
ISPs have every right to enforce the TOS you have agreed too:
1) by blocking outbound traffic from servers being operated on residential service.
2) by blocking customers who provide their residential service to third parties by hosting and distributing content for them.
So get over it and start abiding by the TOS you have agreed too. Then there will be no issue.
|
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| Using outbound traffic is against the TOS? Please show me in the TOS where I'm not allowed to send traffic. Hell, ANY protocol could be considered a 'server' by your logic. If I upload an FTP, that's outbound traffic. Running a CLIENT isn't running a SERVER. The fact that I'm SENDING data can't be against the TOS, cause otherwise I couldn't GET data. And please explain how a CLIENT is providing service to a third party. I REQUEST data, I SEND data. Hell, by posting this I am doing BOTH.
The simple fact of the matter is that comcast CAN'T PROVIDE what they are selling, and they are using ILLEGAL tactics to try and prevent people from USING what they paid for. If a comcast node can't SUPPORT 1mb upstream, then they shouldn't SELL 1mb upstream. Provide what you sell, and then there will be no issue.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
 ·ViaTalk
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B  :ISPs have every right to enforce the TOS you have agreed too: 1) by blocking outbound traffic from servers being operated on residential service. 2) by blocking customers who provide their residential service to third parties by hosting and distributing content for them. So get over it and start abiding by the TOS you have agreed too. Then there will be no issue. Your posting history shows that you have some form of vendetta against any definition of server other than your own, even when some very talented people have explained to you in detail what may/may not be a server.
Why is that?
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·ViaTalk
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :The simple fact of the matter is that comcast CAN'T PROVIDE what they are selling, and they are using ILLEGAL tactics to try and prevent people from USING what they paid for. If a comcast node can't SUPPORT 1mb upstream, then they shouldn't SELL 1mb upstream. Provide what you sell, and then there will be no issue. How do you know what Comcast can provide? The Sandvine issue is relatively new; I haven't had any problems with my Comcast speed before or since it was implemented.
Oh, and PUTTING every other WORD in CAPS doesn't MAKE what you SAY a FACT. |
|
Hehe
@verizon.net
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B :ISPs have every right to enforce the TOS you have agreed too: 1) by blocking outbound traffic from servers being operated on residential service. 2) by blocking customers who provide their residential service to third parties by hosting and distributing content for them. So get over it and start abiding by the TOS you have agreed too. Then there will be no issue. Bittorrent is a client. If you think of it as a server then many on-line games would also be considered servers.
That is just stupid. |
|
Tsume
BOBBARR2008 .COM
join:2004-02-23
Winter Park, FL
·ViaTalk
·Cox HSI
| reply to ptrowski
Nearly everything is a server.
Saying you cannot run a server in your TOS is like saying here's a 5,000mbit optical fibre connection, but you can only browse webpages and check your email.
Hosting a Warcraft III game is banned by the ToS/AUP. Using VNC is banned by the ToS/AUP. Using Bittorrent to download the latest edition of Linux Mint is banned by the ToS/AUP.
Give me a break. Their adverts indicate I can do above things, voiding their own ToS.
A couple lovely snippets from my ISP's page selling their HSI [emphasis by me]:
# PowerBoost
* Cable modem technology that gives you a boost of speed for video, photos, music and any large file access
ANY large file access. Implies I can access the large file any damn way I want.
Great for Gaming
Which means it is not against the "no servers" rule to host a game of WarIII, Starcraft, D2 (all of those Blizzard games act as a server), or run a Battlefield 2 server for friends. You can't call it great for gaming if you can't play with your friends the way you'd like.
As for them allowing VNC... their own little esupport tool is a derivative of VNC. They are breaking their own rule? I'm aware that their version may act as a client and not a server, but that doesn't make it any less obvious that a big fat blanket "no servers" rule should not exist in any way shape or form.
--
"Did you know that when one little panda pulls on another little panda's underwear, that's sexual harassment? That makes me a sa-a-a-a-ad panda." --Sexual Harassment Panda |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :Using outbound traffic is against the TOS? Please show me in the TOS where I'm not allowed to send traffic. Hell, ANY protocol could be considered a 'server' by your logic. If I upload an FTP, that's outbound traffic. Running a CLIENT isn't running a SERVER. The fact that I'm SENDING data can't be against the TOS, cause otherwise I couldn't GET data. And please explain how a CLIENT is providing service to a third party. I REQUEST data, I SEND data. Hell, by posting this I am doing BOTH. The simple fact of the matter is that comcast CAN'T PROVIDE what they are selling, and they are using ILLEGAL tactics to try and prevent people from USING what they paid for. If a comcast node can't SUPPORT 1mb upstream, then they shouldn't SELL 1mb upstream. Provide what you sell, and then there will be no issue.
Did not say outbound traffic is against TOS. Suggest you read again and keep my statement complete instead of removing key elements that do not suite you.
Protocol being used has nothing to do with it. Servers are not limited to only certain protocols.
Correct, running a client is not running a server. But this issue is not about clients but about servers.
Correct sending data is not against TOS. But running a server is.
Hosting content for third party and making that content available via your residential ISP service to fourth parties is in fact providing your residential service to a third party.
Comcast’s inability to provide what they are selling is irrelevant. They have the right to block servers and providing the service to third parties.
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski :Your posting history shows that you have some form of vendetta against any definition of server other than your own, even when some very talented people have explained to you in detail what may/may not be a server. Why is that?
Oh yes some very talented people who tried to justify BTs by claiming browser are servers too because of cookies. And when I called them on it they could not dispute me. You all are grasping at straws to justify your violation of the TOS you have agreed too.
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR | reply to Tsume
The issue is not with you accessing files any way you want. The issue is with you running a server to host them for third parties.
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @06:10PM
| reply to Hehe
said by Hehe :
Bittorrent is a client. If you think of it as a server then many on-line games would also be considered servers.
That is just stupid.
We have already been down that road in another thread. But whether or not games, browser, etc. are servers is irrelevant to whether or not bit torrents are servers. Which they are. And they violate at least two items in most residential TOS.
|
|
Tsume
BOBBARR2008 .COM
join:2004-02-23
Winter Park, FL
·ViaTalk
·Cox HSI
| reply to N O Y B
said by N O Y B :The issue is not with you accessing files any way you want. The issue is with you running a server to host them for third parties. If the way to access the file automatically includes that caveat, that isn't my problem.
--
"Did you know that when one little panda pulls on another little panda's underwear, that's sexual harassment? That makes me a sa-a-a-a-ad panda." --Sexual Harassment Panda |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @07:13PM
| said by Tsume :If the way to access the file automatically includes that caveat, that isn't my problem.
Correct. It is the problem of the persons hosting the content you are accessing. Which in the case of bit torrents it is likely being "throttled" due to the person hosting the content being a on a residential service and thus violating their TOS.
|
|
Tsume
BOBBARR2008 .COM
join:2004-02-23
Winter Park, FL
·ViaTalk
·Cox HSI
| Where in the ToS, or in the law even, does it say it is okay to pretend to be someone else? I believe that's forgery, and is against the law. That's what they are doing with the RST packets.
--
"Did you know that when one little panda pulls on another little panda's underwear, that's sexual harassment? That makes me a sa-a-a-a-ad panda." --Sexual Harassment Panda |
|
college student
@omcastbusiness.net
| reply to N O Y B
Okay, so playing on Xbox Live is also against Comcast's TOS? Yet you don't see them banning users on that service, yet.
What has been and is currently the goal of Comcast's TOS is to minimize the amount of bandwidth a user consumes at any given time, reducing their cost to run their network. Comcast's problem is they've oversold their network and instead of upgrading capacity they've chosen to filter specific traffic.
Using restrictions like no servers may be operated on this connection are problematic because as the internet has evolved so have the applications. Even people that don't download movies or music (like me) still end up running servers, like when I play Halo or other games online.
Comcast's TOS is grossly out of date in terms of what people expect out of their ISPs today. If you wanted to take it verbatim like you are doing then Comcast needs to kick off a good 50% of their users, because at some time, they have ran a server.
In the end what Comcast done is applied a blanket solution to filter all BT content, when in all reality they need to reduce speeds so the network can support the users, or upgrade capacity. |
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| reply to N O Y B
Just remember boys and girls, you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ all because it's against the TOS.
Why do they even give us upstream if they dont want us to push data? ***sarcasm or was it*****
The TOS is written by lawyers with many loopholes that is used to the advantage of the money taker.
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
edit:
November 28th, @07:55PM
| reply to college student
Hey, you (and others) are the one(s) who agreed to their TOS. So you have no one to blame but yourself(s).
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to Tsume
said by Tsume :Where in the ToS, or in the law even, does it say it is okay to pretend to be someone else? I believe that's forgery, and is against the law. That's what they are doing with the RST packets.
I nor anyone else here are who you need to convince of that. File a law suite if you think they are engaging in illegal conduct. Then you will be given the opportunity to convince those who can actually do something about it.
|
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @09:24PM
| reply to hopeflicker
said by hopeflicker :Just remember boys and girls, you can not allow grandma to access your private ftp server to get your vacation movies, you can not BT the new movie trailer to your neighbor, you can not send your new fave song to your girlfriend via AIM/ICQ all because it's against the TOS. Why do they even give us upstream if they dont want us to push data? ***sarcasm or was it***** The TOS is written by lawyers with many loopholes that is used to the advantage of the money taker.
So you can upload your content to an appropriate host.
If you do not like your ISPs TOS then why did you agree to them. Try writing your own TOS and see if they will agree to them.
|
|
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| oh, so now it's an "appropriate host"
So uploading (like in the examples above) is breaking the TOS.
That's nice. 
--
People pray to God because they're told to. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
edit:
November 28th, @09:50PM
| said by hopeflicker :oh, so now it's an "appropriate host" So uploading (like in the examples above) is breaking the TOS. That's nice.
Always has been about "appropriate host".
When you host content for third parties with your residential service, which is the case with bit torrents, yes that is a violation of TOS.
1) running a server
2) providing the ISPs service to a third party
If you wish to share your content with others upload it to a legitimate hosted server. That way your residential up stream bandwidth gets used only once, even though the content may be viewed/downloaded/accessed/etc. many times by many others.
|
|
