MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Southwest
| Vuze should just strike a deal with Comcast
...instead of wrapping themselves in the flag of "network neutrality" and making legalistic arguments in front of the government. I find this hypocritical.
They are a business. They should make a business arrangement with Comcast. How hard would it be to figure out a way to identify their packets so that they don't get shaped?
Comcast's business model is not "let a thousand always-on P2P uploaders bloom". That's why their TOS is what it is. It is within their rights as a business to specify what capabilities its users get for the money they pay.
Vuze seems to think that they should be able to run to the government and FORCE THOSE EVIL PIPE OWNERS to support their P2P at full throttle, thus putting money in THEIR pockets and taking it out of Comcast's. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | comcast's business model IS providing a pipe to their customers.
comcast WANTS their business model to be differentiated service based on whether someone pays them not to interfere with traffic requested by a comcast customer |
|
kcblack
Premium
join:2000-09-11
Chicago, IL
 ·RCN CABLE
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Its an easy way to distribute data that doesn't require big pipes. As far as I'm concerned, what I PAY for is what I get and if I want to download/upload LEGAL data all day, then Comcast better be bending over and providing the service that I pay for.
In my opinion, the moment they "forged" packets designed to interrupt the flow of LEGITIMATE traffic, they became felons. Even more when they didn't own up to what they were doing, they engaged in a conspiracy to commit fraud and cover up that crime.
In my perfect world they would have actually put in the infrastructure that they were supposed to when they were supposed to in order to get the concessions that they got from the government (actual two way symmetric service) instead of this god awful up/down nonsense.
Kevin
--
"Because we’ve invested over $4 billion in building our MegaBand network so you can enjoy the internet the way it was intended to be – fast and uncapped." (RCN marketing Promo) |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
1 edit | reply to nasadude
said by nasadude  :comcast's business model IS providing a pipe to their customers. comcast WANTS their business model to be differentiated service based on whether someone pays them not to interfere with traffic requested by a comcast customer I almost agree with you.
I think what's going on is that Comcast's business model started as providing a pipe, but they made certain assumptions about the shared use of that pipe, which would allow them to "oversell" capacity, similarly to what the airlines do... oversell seats because they know, based on past experience, that a certain percentage of customers won't show up.
Now, with BitTorrent coming in and dramatically ramping up shared use of the pipe, they are discovering their assumptions don't hold any more.
So, now they are trying to change their business model to accomodate this change in usage patterns. Fundamentally, they are trying to shut down BitTorrent users when they start interfering with their "old model" customers.
The whole question is, are they within their rights to do this. Are they like a regulated monopoly utility who, in return for their monopoly status, must operate under a set of restrictive rules? Or, are they in a competitive business, where they are free to react and change based on competition, demand, and changing business conditions?
"Network Neutrality" is heading towards the "regulated monopoly" model. The carriers clearly want to go the other way.
What frosts my chops, as I said in the original post, is that the pro-network-neutrality companies are so hypocritical. It's a business matter. Yet, they wrap themselves in this ideological flag and wave it bravely for all to see. The fact that they WANT to own the dynamic, expanding part of this market, and RELEGATE their rivals to just being "dumb pipes", is lost. They just want the government to do their work for them. |
|
DarkSyde
join:2006-06-07
Akron, OH
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Where does it end? Should they then also be paid by Blizzard for distributing ALL of their patches and content updates for WoW through a BitTorrent client? Certainly they (Blizzard) use far more of their (Comcast) bandwidth. We then end up in a situation where the 'ISP' is no longer an ISP and is allowed to more or less extort any company that utilizes P2P to distribute content, and from there you can kiss neutrality goodbye. |
|
