Penguins
Have You Played Atari Today?
join:2001-12-01
Cleveland, OH
| The BIG difference that everyone is ignoring.
The reason the cable-tv to internet analogy is invalid is that the cable company does not own or have the exclusive rights to the data they are providing.
Unlike cable TV, where you are essentially agreeing to private viewing of privately owned content, no last mile provider can claim any kind of ownership of the data they are providing.
They dont own the internet and once you obtain the data from them, they cant stop you from redistributing it.
Now there are very vague laws that prohibit the retransmission of 'any cable company service'. I dont believe this law should apply to retransmission of downloaded data since the cable company has no ownership or exclusive contractual right to broadcast it.
Upstream is another matter... thats probably theft of service since the upstream delivery service was contracted to a specific person. |
|
wkendrvr
join:2001-07-09
Greensboro, NC
| Get a clue folks, its not yours to give away!!
You folks crack me up. You piss and moan when you can't get 3000kbs download speeds, but you want someone to leave an open access WAP around for someone to suck down the bandwidth? Can't have it both ways. I have no problem with someone wanting to share bandwidth, but I do when it is MY bandwidth he is sharing!! If he was sharing the cable tv service all of the neighborhood, no one would even question his actions. And the fact that they don't own the internet is a non-issue. They own the access method that you are using and they can control what you can and can't do with it. If you don't like it, go get a dedicated circuit for megabucks a month and do with it as you wish. |
|
TechieRoy
join:2002-01-31
Oklahoma City, OK | reply to Penguins
Re: The BIG difference that everyone is ignoring.
Hmmmm...
How about if I run a spliter and phone line to 20 houses in my neighborhood? (Technical hurdles withstanding)
Think they would be upset if 20 customers called and cancelled because they all now shared one phone line? |
|
ksuderman
join:2001-10-21
Poughkeepsie, NY
| reply to Penguins
said by Penguins:
Unlike cable TV, where you are essentially agreeing to private viewing of privately owned content, no last mile provider can claim any kind of ownership of the data they are providing.
They dont own the internet and once you obtain the data from them, they cant stop you from redistributing it.
Yes they can, at least over their network. They are not claiming ownership of the content they are saying that you can't redistribute the service they provide to you, and that is perfectly enforcable. You did sign a contract didn't you?
If you don't believe me then get yourself cut off and take TWCNYC to court to force them to re-install service. At best you'll get laughed out of court, at worst you'll get in trouble for filing a nuisance lawsuit.
If you want to become an ISP there are several companies that would be more than willing to run a T1, T3, OC48, etc cable to your residence for thousands and thousands (and thousands) of dollars per month. You can redistribute that to your hearts content. If you want to pay ~$40 per month you have to agree to a certain set of rules... and then follow them or risk losing your service.
said by clrankin:
A good analogy here would be purchasing access to a PPV event, and then inviting the entire neighborhood over to watch while throwing a party.
No it's not, it's a terrible analogy. If you want to share your internet connection in that fashion then invite all your neighbors to your house to watch over your shoulder while you surf the net. Sharing you internet connection in that fashion is just fine.
Hosting a public wireless network to share your internet connection is the same as wiring your neighbors house to share your cable TV or phone line. You can end up with the police at your door for that! |
|
