said by Do you think :

three words.
"Common Carrier Regulations".

if they are shaping and deliberately controlling what goes on and off their network, it would seem to me that they would no longer be a common carrier, and then be liable for the content on their network, right?

said by Nightfall :

You bring up good point upon good point. There is a case to be made thats for sure. So why has no case been made?

What about cases for people who have found their service terminated for using too much bandwidth? What about cases where cable and DSL companies apply speed caps to peoples lines who are heavy users?

Until things change, this is the way its going to be.

said by jhigh420 :

I'm not willing to leave comcast when they have the best broadband service in my area and a simple google search will get you around "traffic shaping." A LOT of ISPs are forging packets, not just comcast.

said by funchords :

Sorry that I presumed too much.

Except that they don't. "As they see fit" is too broad. It's not entirely their network. They borrowed money from lenders, probably giving some indication and accepting certain restrictions as to what they planned to do with it in order to get a good interest rate. They sold stock, issuing similar statements to investors as to what businesses they were in and planned to go to. They installed their lines across public and private property, often drawing permits from public entities describing the public utility nature of their business. Going back, to get approval for certain acquisitions or to fend off even stricter regulation, they made assurances that they would not delay, degrade, or deny service. The FCC based its Broadband Policy Statement on these assurances and others. They sold these services to consumers, usually requiring payment in advance for them and promising delivery. In varying degrees of strength or weakness, these actions are now binding upon them.

In short, I believe there's a case to be made that others have an interest in their network. Within the bounds of "reasonable network management," they do have choices they can make.

said by Nightfall :

Who says I am on their side?

said by Nightfall :

I just said that they have a right to do with their service as they see fit.

said by SilverSurfer :

No, actually, there aren't anymore. Electricity was deregulated long ago, as in back in '98 or '99, which is why California had all the fun with the rolling blackouts and their providers gaming the market to ensure maximum consumer screwover. But then, I wouldn't expect you to remember that not being a resident of the State.

said by funchords :

You may ignore the facts all you wish, but ignoring them doesn't change any of them.

They have the right to "Reasonable Network Management," which means that they have to now make a case that what they did was reasonable.

Someone whose actions are reasonable usually doesn't have to resort to hiding those actions, then denying them, then hiring seat-fillers pretending to have public support, then resorting to only half-truthful admissions about them.

Hell, even Comcast itself is abandoning these tactics by the end of the year -- so even they're not on your side in this argument!

said by jhigh420 :

I'm not willing to leave comcast when they have the best broadband service in my area and a simple google search will get you around "traffic shaping."

said by jhigh420 :

A LOT of ISPs are forging packets, not just comcast.

said by Nightfall :

Since they own the network, they can regulate what comes in and goes out of their network. Like it or not, its their right.

said by Nightfall :

There are governmental regulations around electricity.

said by SilverSurfer :

Just like customers can go elsewhere when their local electricity utility decides when and for how long you will have an unimpeded flow of electricity. Hey, it's their electricity, after all. Go get your electricity elsewhere.

said by Nightfall :

Their customers can go find better service elsewhere.

said by funchords :

How many competitors there are is actually beside the point. They are selling High-Speed **INTERNET** Service. That word means something, just like the word Gasoline means something.

Comcast owns the network but doesn't own the Internet. They're not allowed to do anything they want to it any more than your gas station can change the standard formula for its product.

Morally, if not also legally, they should be shipping my bits without any concern for what is inside of them.

said by funchords :

So, following that thinking, the Shell station can add a cup of water to every gallon of gasoline. After all, it's their station. If customers don't like it, they can just get gas elsewhere.

said by Nightfall :

Its their network after all. Comcast can shape what it wants. If customers don't like it, they can move to another provider.