N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
| reply to karlmarx
Re: ISPs Have Right to Enforce Terms of Service
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.
|
|
college student
@omcastbusiness.net
| 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. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
edit:
November 28th, @07:55PM
|
Hey, you (and others) are the one(s) who agreed to their TOS. So you have no one to blame but yourself(s).
|
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | you do know that TOS is not law right? |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
|
said by backness :you do know that TOS is not law right?
Yes. It is an agreement the ISPs customers have agreed to abide by. And the ISPs have every right to enforce the terms of service.
|
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to N O Y B
"Comcast’s inability to provide what they are selling is irrelevant"
WHOA! That's the MOST RELEVANT part of this entire discussion. That's like Ford selling a car that can only go 4000 miles a year. No one would ever stand for that. Why does comcast get to sell something they don't provide? I sure would hate to go shopping with you, where you pay for 2lbs of steak, but only walk out of the store with 6oz.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. |
|
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| said by karlmarx :"Comcast’s inability to provide what they are selling is irrelevant" WHOA! That's the MOST RELEVANT part of this entire discussion. That's like Ford selling a car that can only go 4000 miles a year. No one would ever stand for that. Why does comcast get to sell something they don't provide? I sure would hate to go shopping with you, where you pay for 2lbs of steak, but only walk out of the store with 6oz.
Though it maybe, and likely is, an issue, it is not relevant to the issue of residential TOS violation by operating servers and providing the service to third parties.
|
|
