Down But Not UpPA ISP to restrict peer to peer uploads ( old news - 10:33AM Thursday Nov 07 2002) tags: Fileswapping Most U.S. providers have quietly promoted file trading, running vague ads with PC users cheerfully making CD compilations. Very few have banned p2p altogether, yet ISP's may eventually start forcing users to pay more, or face restrictions. A Pennsylvania provider named Prolog (PenTeleData) has "strongly suggested" against using p2p applications, sending customers a letter asking them to disable uploads within their p2p clients. The letter also suggests that the company may employ the use of upload filters to block such traffic in the future. ----- Dear ProLog Express Customer,
This critical system announcement applies only to customers who use such peer-to-peer file sharing
applications as Kazaa, Gnutella, Morpheus and others.
In an effort to improve overall network performance and increase the quality of your ProLog Express
Internet service, PenTeleData will not support and strongly discourages Internet customers from using
peer-to-peer file sharing programs.
PenTeleData asks those customers using peer-to-peer file-sharing applications to disable uploads
immediately. If this announcement pertains to you, please change your software configuration now.
Additionally, PenTeleData may soon implement filters to prevent ProLog Express customers from uploading
files to peer-to-peer networks. ProLog Express users who download files from peer-to-peer networks will not
lose their ability to download, but once the filters are in place, you will lose the ability to upload
files to the peer-to-peer networks.
Why does PenTeleData prohibit ProLog Express Internet customers from uploading through file-sharing
applications? -Serving files from a residential account – whether FTP or file-sharing -- is a violation of the
Acceptable Use Policy.
Please review the AUP at: »www.ptd.net/POLICIES-RES.html
-Serving files via file-sharing applications congests your upstream Internet connection. Ultimately, this
results in poorer download speeds for you during your period online.
-Serving others' copyrighted files via file-sharing applications, without the copyright holder's
permission, is illegal. Daily, PenTeleData receives demands from copyright owners to terminate service to a
user because that user offered copyrighted material to others without permission. Under our current policy,
we notify the user of the alleged violation and give them a chance to delete the offending material. If the
material is not removed, we are required to terminate the user's account.
-Serving files via peer-to-peer file-sharing applications encourage – and make it easy – for
users from anywhere around the world to download files from your computer as long as it’s turned on,
even if you aren’t using it, with or without your knowledge. This creates security concerns and
further consumes Internet bandwidth and taxes PenTeleData’s network unnecessarily.
While PenTeleData cannot support the use of these apps, instructions on how to disable the uploading and
serving capabilities of several popular peer-to-peer file-serving applications are linked below.
»www.penteledata.net/DFSP/
PenTeleData cannot offer phone or e-mail support for these applications. If you have any questions
regarding these instructions, or need instructions on how to disable programs not listed here, please refer
to documentation associated with that application.Thank you for your time and attention on this matter, and we appreciate your continued support.
Sincerely,
PenTeleData Management
Related:- French Court Guts 'Three Strikes' Law
- 67% Of Pirates Would Ignore Warning Letters
- Jamie Thomas Guilty -- A Song's Worth $80,000
- Music Industry Wants ISPs To Adhere To Nonexistent Laws
- Spain Shoots Down 'Three Strikes' Idea
- The Pirate Bay Gets Sold
- Pirate Bay Sale Sees Insider Trading
- Thomas To Appeal Huge RIAA Fines
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 
schmunk
Premium
join:2001-03-03
Defiance, OH |  Look's like were waking up in Russia!
| |
|  | ihaddsl
join:2001-12-05
/dev/hda0
 ·Comcast
| Re: Look's like were waking up in Russia! said by schmunk  :
I guest paying for internet is looking more and more like waking up in Russia!!!!!
Um yea, Russia has a lot to do with this. This is corporate America.
do you even know anything about Russia or are you just an ignorant troll?
--
War has no winners, only losers | |
| | | vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
| Re: Look's like were waking up in Russia! said by ihaddsl :
Um yea, Russia has a lot to do with this. This is corporate America.
do you even know anything about Russia or are you just an ignorant troll?
Does the word analogy mean anything to you?
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
| | | | ihaddsl
join:2001-12-05
/dev/hda0
·Comcast
| Re: Look's like were waking up in Russia! said by vic102482 :
said by ihaddsl :
Um yea, Russia has a lot to do with this. This is corporate America.
do you even know anything about Russia or are you just an ignorant troll?
Does the word analogy mean anything to you?
sure but that's not one - the connotation is that in Russia you are not allowed to do anything such as download P2P. Nothing could be further from the truth, in fact Russia is a big warez source.
anyway it's OT
--
War has no winners, only losers | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 
Cousin Dave
Trendsetter
Premium
join:2002-10-29
NN,VA |  Re: Look's like were waking up in Russia!
| |
| | | 
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net | Why would you go out of your way to flame someone's first post.
Schmunk doesn't begin to deserve your attitude. | |
| | | vdbleu
join:2001-12-07
St Catharines, ON
| said by ihaddsl :
said by schmunk :
I guest paying for internet is looking more and more like waking up in Russia!!!!!
Um yea, Russia has a lot to do with this. This is corporate America.
do you even know anything about Russia or are you just an ignorant troll?
Russia / America - whats the difference? Russians have freedoms Americans lost once the Bushwackers took office. | |
| | 
sbhusted
join:2000-05-14
Bethlehem, PA
 ·PenTeleData
| As a former ProLag subscriber and currently using them through my employer... the best solution is to switch ISPs if you have any chance at all.
I know they have a monopoly in many communities and I truly sympathize with them... but ProLag is a pretty horrible ISP for those who like to use the internet for anything more than the occasional email and browsing.
--
Scott B. Hustedhttp://www.Husted.cc | |
| |
drow
@scvmaxonline.c | need i mention that on a little island called Singapore, my broadband upload speed is capped at 24kbps. talk abt a rip-off service provider man. | |
| | |
Sin-ga-Pore
@net.sg | Re: waking up in singpore.... Oh yeah, SCV user huh?
I don't have it much better under DSL either......... | |
| Riplin
join:2002-05-13
canada | The 11th Commandment 11. Thou shalt not Share | |
| |
B1FFster
@co.uk
| Re: The 11th Commandment If the ISP sold you a '2Mb down/512k up' connection and you're paying for it, how can they turn around and define what is considered acceptable upload traffic ?
It's like they sell you xyz then turn around and complain because "You're actually using it". I mean come on! Make them at least change the wording on their product if they're going to come up with this kind of nonsense. | |
| | | VaLUnTriAn
join:2002-11-10
Effort, PA
| Who cares about religion and the commandments They didn't sell you anything. You are renting your connection from them. They can do whatever they want with the connection and they will. You signed up and agreed with their terms, now live with them! Lets see you start your own ISP and then when the RIAA gets on you to terminate this customer or turn over this customer when you don't want to, what would you do. You don't have the power to fight Sony, Fox, Columbia, or any other large record or movie studio. This is exactly what you would do.
It's not even like they said they are definately going to do this anyway. They said they may consider it if people don't start watching what they are letting other users take from them. | |
| | | |
cesss
@verizon.ne
| Re: Who cares about religion and the commandments what, does your daddy work for RIAA, shup up, sit down - log off, acceptable uses for ftp have been found for other purposes than copyright infringment, like submitting photos and home movies of my son to other family members, if my son is named marshall and i try to upload it and their filter sux, then my family might not get to watch it, i think you should kill yourself or eat some of magic johnsons gizzum | |
| 
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA
| Grrrrr.. Sick Communist! What's next, are they going to charge just to be able to use P2P applications? I think the best route would be to disconnect from this ISP service and find a better ISP service, and watch how fast they change their tune.
It's kinda weak that they don't have the available bandwith to keep everybody on their network happy. | |
| | | |
Commie Scum
@attbi.com
| Hey dumb fsck. Communist? While not exactly communist, file sharing is a fairly socialist concept. Socialism believes (among other things) in sharing what you have with those that don't have. You don't have some of my good CDs, you can download them over P2P. That’s a fairly socialist (which is the foundation for communism) idea.
Think before you slander something you know nothing about you ignorant prick.
----
The party's over, but I’m still dancing. | |
| 
rit56
join:2000-12-01
New York, NY | amazing time to switch ISP's. even if you never use p2p's get rid of this company. they deserve bankruptcy. on your knees and kiss Corporate American ass. boycott this damn company. I pay you money for a service and you provide , you don't dictate to me. | |
| | 
NOVA_Guy
The EVIL TRIO- Obama, Pelosi, and Dodd
Premium
join:2002-03-05
Purcellville, VA
| Re: amazing As long as a customer is not substantially hurting the ISP's network (by hacking, using excessive bandwidth by uncapping a modem or using another similar hack), the ISP should not dictate what users can and cannot do. They are providing a service-- just like cell phone companies and local telephone companies do. I can't recall the last time Verizon told me that I could not call someone on my cell phone ("upload data")-- and they won't, so long as the bill gets paid on time. Why should ISPs be any different?
Restricting uploads and/or downloads on the ISP's network in any manner is a form of censorship. If such uploads and downloads are "killing" the ISP's network (via bandwidth consumption), then the ISP should upgrade the network and purchase the necessary bandwidth to the extent possible. Now, if this means modest price increases to users (to cover the cost of such upgrades), then fine. At that point the users are paying for faster connections-- they're getting something extra for the money.
But to create a policy that prohibits all users from sharing files in a P2P network is wrong-- especially when there are so many legitimate uses of these networks.
It seems as though more and more businesses these days have long forgotten the motto "The customer is always right". As long as someone is paying for a connection and not harming the ISP's network, the ISP shouldn't care what they do.
--
Live in Northern Virginia? Take a stand and fight for good service-- don't be a Cox Sucker! | |
| | | 
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL
| Re: amazing "The customer is always right"
Except when the customer is walking out of the store without paying for, or in possession of, illicit goods. Majority of p2p traffic is indeed such, so I think that blows your argument out of the water.
Legitimate uses? Sure. Realistic daily use? Theft (tantamount, at least.)
While I don't agree that things like this should technically be happening, I do agree that the ISP can and rightfully should limit traffic on their network if such applications consume the large majority of the service. Making the argument that they should 'upgrade/buy more bandwidth' is moot--they're just aiding and abetting at that point.
Fact of the matter is that we're using THEIR networks. Yes, we pay them, but yes, we also agree (when we sign up/use) to follow their rules. Make no mistake, they can and do change rules in their AUP, but running upload streams via those clients is exactly as running a server which is strictly against TOS in most broadband connections.
Justifying it with the 'everyone does it' argument makes it no less wrong.
Now, the ISPs that quietly advertise these clients have admittedly less to say against their use, but they still own the links. Like it or not, they can take their ball and go home if you don't play by their rules.
I really would love to see the statistics of legitimate p2p usage that everyone touts. Loving made-up statistics as much as the next person, I'd say that is likely less than 1% of the actual traffic conducted over them.
Looks, acts, quacks; duck. | |
| | | | 
dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI
| Re: amazing ...And nike should not let X people wear their gym shoes since they might committ a crime while wearing them. And its nike's responsibility to ensure that no crimes are committed by anyone wearing their shoes.
...And Ford should not let X people drive their cars since they might committ a crime while driving one. And its Ford's responsibility to ensure that no crimes are committed by anyone driving their cars.
...And Smith & Wesson...No wait, that actually went to court and lost. Precident?
Your legitimate usage arguement holds no water. WiFi came out of milirary applications. How many other technologoes in US came out of the military. P2P is developing. Just because people use it for illegal things now does not mean thats all its good for, nor does it mean that is all it will ever be used for.
[text was edited by author 2002-11-07 12:30:22] | |
| | | | |
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL
| Re: amazing Interesting analogies, but they aren't particularly sound. If the percentage of the users who commit crimes in Nikes was anywhere near what users perform on p2p networks (read: virtual majority of the upstream traffic in home computers), then yes, Nike could dictate things like they did with guns--background checks, for example! Gun makers aren't the ones performing the checks, but rather the sellers. Likewise, Backbone providers aren't responsible for the traffic--the ISPs are (to an extent, at least).
I also believe that it is REQUIRED of people to have insurance on cars. You know, just in case something happens while they're at the wheel (purposeful or not; reckless vehicular manslaughter, perhaps?) Again, it isn't the manufacturer, but rather the pass-through that requires insurance.
Your last two examples have fail-safes (which aren't terribly fail-SAFE, but still.) to prevent wanton abuse of the system. Your first is just silly! =)
I asked for legitimate usage of p2p statistics because, quite frankly, I do not feel that there is much 'legitimate' file swapping going on.
I never said they should deign that p2p applications are 99% or 100% illegal traffic. I merely assert the blatantly obvious that currently, without checks & balances, that IS what they are primarily used for.
Good intentions or not, but if a device is primarily used for illegal transactions, more than likely there will be regulation to minimize said transactions and emphasize the legitimate use of the device. That is what I suggest =) | |
| | | |
NOVA_Guy
The EVIL TRIO- Obama, Pelosi, and Dodd
Premium
join:2002-03-05
Purcellville, VA
| said by tsu9 :
While I don't agree that things like this should technically be happening, I do agree that the ISP can and rightfully should limit traffic on their network if such applications consume the large majority of the service. Making the argument that they should 'upgrade/buy more bandwidth' is moot--they're just aiding and abetting at that point.
If all of the traffic on P2P networks was pirated software and copyrighted music, I would agree that an ISP upgrading their connection just for P2P would be aiding and abetting. However, no ISP has gone so far as to prove this, and I would argue that none reasonably could without substantial privacy violations.
quote:
Fact of the matter is that we're using THEIR networks. Yes, we pay them, but yes, we also agree (when we sign up/use) to follow their rules.
And I'm using Verizon's network when I make a cellular telephone call. Does that give them the right to dictate that I may not make calls ("upload") using their network, or that I may not discuss certain things while talking on the phone? No. It's the same thing here-- an ISP provides the service, and has no business dictating the content or activity that takes place as a result of such service.
I really have to wonder how far the enforcement of AUPs could really go in some certain circumstances-- given the lack of due consideration to the user in exchange for being governed by such restrictive documents.
The user has already given money in exchange for the connection-- due consideration exists there. IMHO, the ISP should not be allowed to get away with tacking an AUP onto their service and enforcing it without giving further "consideration" to the customer.
As some of you may know, contracts are unenforcable without due consideration being given from each party. In other words, a "contract" in which the customer "agrees" to abide by an AUP is, IMHO, unenforcable without the ISP giving something to the customer in exchange. The connection/service should not be thought of as "due consideration" at this point, because a transaction has already taken place which gave the user the connection already (when the user gave the ISP money for it). Perhaps if courts and others would start looking at the agreement and enforcement of AUPs as a matter separate from the exchange of money for a service, ISPs wouldn't be able to get away with as much as they can. But we're getting a little off-topic here.
quote:
Justifying it with the 'everyone does it' argument makes it no less wrong.
I agree. The fact that everybody uses P2P apps doesn't make trading copyrighted files over them any lesser of a violation of the law. I, however, would still like to restate that not all P2P users are pirating copyrighted material. There are legitimate uses of P2P applications, and I would venture to guess that the amount of legitimate use is much greater than 1%. (what can be asserted without fact can be argued against without fact equally well)
The RIAA likes to make a big deal out of the illegal use, and I don't blame them. It is, after all, money out of their big, greedy pockets. Of course, the RIAA will never tell you that there are some artists who are using P2P networks in an attempt to make a name for themselves by freely distributing their own music over them. The RIAA doesn't want people to hear about this. Ultimately, IMHO, the main reason the RIAA is opposed to P2P networks is not because their music is distributed without profit over them. It is because they cannot control the P2P networks. They do not have total control over the distribution channel, and because of that P2P networks present a viable threat and substantial competition to them. The RIAA, not liking these things, has chosen to attack P2P networks by ignoring the truth in many cases.
For an ISP to buy in to the "P2P networks are for pirates" mantra that the RIAA has been chanting is a disappointment and a shame. We would all be much better off if they did the reasonable thing and just told the RIAA where to stuff it.
--
Live in Northern Virginia? Take a stand and fight for good service-- don't be a Cox Sucker! | |
| | | | |
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL
| Re: amazing I don't know how to quote, so I will address your rebuttal in order which your response was dictated.
"If all of the traffic on P2P networks was pirated software and copyrighted music, I would agree that an ISP upgrading their connection just for P2P would be aiding and abetting. "
I suggest you look at Morpheus et al for examples in which a (p2p) application has been (rightfully) deemed primarily used for illicit transactions. Now add in common filetypes such as .zip, .rar, .iso, .mpg, .avi, and .bin, and you have plenty more to look at. I suggest you view those filetypes in any popular (or unpopular) p2p application for the sheer volume of information being swapped which, in all likelyhood (yes, there are legitimate files of those types--rare that they are) to see how many queues, sends, heaping mounds of information is being swapped. I offer that as base evidence. I suggest that legitimate files are swapped in far less quantities, statistically.
"Does that give them the right to dictate that I may not make calls ("upload") using their network..."
Yes. I beleive they can also charge you for the usage, too. Upload, in this case, is dissimilar to the data stream upload, unless you are using WiFi or such. Voice data is generally not copywritten =) Though, there is something to be said for being able to convict soeone on evidence of wiretaps. So yes.
"IMHO, the ISP should not be allowed to get away with tacking an AUP onto their service and enforcing it without giving further "consideration" to the customer."
Well, techinically we all lease our data streams. The Lessor can, and will change the contract from time to time. The Lessee (us), can dispute this by cancellig their service in favor of another. Can't dispute things in a leased situation too effectively when the contract dictates that it can be rewritten at any time. Questionable usage? Sure, but it happens.
"...IMHO, unenforcable without the ISP giving something to the customer in exchange..."
They give the customer their data stream and reasonable privacy. What more do you technically need?
I do agree that the courts should examine AUP/TOS and EULA law more closely; but as it stands, it really is as good as a contractually binding situation when you use the service. You, in effect, agree, each time you use the service, that you will abide by the rules and regulations placed thereupon by the carrier. Not to say they're 100% fair, however =)
"There are legitimate uses of P2P applications, and I would venture to guess that the amount of legitimate use is much greater than 1%. (what can be asserted without fact can be argued against without fact equally well)"
Indeed. It also depends on the parameters, such as volume by bytes, type, or number. However, just looking at one facet, mp3s, would certainly show that illegitimate use far outpaces legitimate artists hocking their wares. (do not confuse with warez  ) I do not, as you state, have evidence to this effect, but it really is plainly obvious. Conversely, neither you do have assertions to back up your legitimate usage. I'll simply state that illegitimate use would appear to be greater than legitimate statistics at first glance. It would, of course, warrant a more in-depth study, but with p2p applications, nothing is static =)
"For an ISP to buy in to the "P2P networks are for pirates" mantra that the RIAA has been chanting is a disappointment and a shame."
Well, technically as they stand, p2p applications are primarily used for such things the RIAA is campaigning against. Not to say that there is no legitimate use, but the unfortunate outlook as of this moment is that illegitimate use outpaces the legit.
I don't like the RIAA as much as the next person, but hey, they do TECHNICALLY have a valid point. Two wrongs do not a right make. =) | |
| | | | | npyoung
join:2002-09-23
Jacksonville, OR
| I'm a wireless ISP, faced with my first client running P2P. So far, this guy has been pretty cool, keeping his stream low enough that I don't freak. I support P2P in general, dispise the RIAA and all that would enforce an outdated and dangerous one-to-many media distribution concept in a many-to-many world. However, that said, if just a few of my customers started doing this...it would be the end of my network. The entire backbone would be saturated, leaving no bandwidth for my other non-P2P customers. So, what have I done? I've gone out and installed a router/bandwidth shaper to deal with this problem. I won't shut it down, but I sure as heck will put a fence around it so it can't tear the place up anytime it feels like it. | |
| | | | | |
youre wrong
@verizon.ne
| Re: amazing um, 1 person going apeshit on kazaa doesnt hit anywhere close to the bandwidth used by big companies that also host their site on their server.
Your hypothetical company would go bankrupt because you made stupid decisions, which is why you are at home on a computer and not running a succesful isp, or anything for that matter, you see, your parents did a horrible job in raising you and I think your dog educated you. | |
| | | | | | | | | Astaroth30
join:2001-09-15
Allentown, PA
| Re: amazing said by borborpa :
Just as they are not responsible for what someone does with their product, neither should an ISP. They merely provide a service. If someone is doing illegal activity on it, they are not responsible for that.
Yet I have personally seen many bars/bartenders being sued by people that used their services and then wrapped their vehicles around poles or other people on the drive home. Not something I agree with, but it is a case of the service provider being responsible (almost ultimately) for their customers.
Again, the action currently taken by PTD is to inform their customers so as to not have to take measures which ends-up disabling an aspect of their service. They did not just come out and say "Thats it! You're cut off" without any warning. | |
| | | |
Mr Perfect
@rr.com | Yes, because p2p goes into my local music store, pockets a cd, and walks out.
Get real please. | |
| | | |
8ball___
@attbi.com
| Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the DOJ find the music industry guilty of Price fixing on CD prices? Why is it legal for the Industry to gouge the consumer, but when something comes along that allows the consumer some power, it must be quashed? You need to understand that the consumer is in charge here...just like the entertainment industry needs to understand this concept. And, it is not THEIR network... My tax dollars paid for the infrastructure that THEY operate on. THEY got tax breaks to come into my community, and when THEY lose their franchise, the infrastructure will remain. So, whose network is it, really? | |
| | | | |
yesyesyes
@verizon.ne | Re: amazing i dont agree on the consumer part, i dont buy cds, never did, tapes are just way too cheap. but anywho, the internet is ours, you are right our taxes paid for its design and implementation, kudos to you, excellent point (albeit moot in this thread) | |
| | | | bagojunk
join:2002-01-05
West Palm Beach, FL
·Comcast
| You missed the point. The only point is that in america, we can make or break companies based on how they treat us (us-the customer-their reason for doing business)
Sure file-sharing is wrong, but stay away from what I pay for each and every month:
1472k/down and 256k/up
How I use it is not only up to me, but should it be found illegal, I would suffer, not this silly company, right?
corporate america | |
| | | 
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| They're a cable ISP, so this isn't surprising; cable ISPs have severely limited upstream bandwidth by the nature of cable return paths, and tend to take the hardest line against servers of any type for that reason.
(If PTD were a DSL ISP, I'd be all over their case, as there is NO legitimate reason whatsoever for ANY DSL ISP to ban servers; upstream bandwidth is limited on a per-customer basis and there's much upstream bandwidth as downstream within the ATM cloud from DSLAMs to ISP and from the ISP out to the rest of the world. In fact, the only DSL ISPs that care are ILEC-owned ".net" ISPs, who are, as always, afraid of losing their T1 and frame customers...)
-SC
--
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/ | |
| | | | 
phxmark
What Country Are We Living In?
join:2000-12-27
Glendale, AZ
| Re: amazing said by roamer1 :
They're a cable ISP, so this isn't surprising; cable ISPs have severely limited upstream bandwidth by the nature of cable return paths, and tend to take the hardest line against servers of any type for that reason.
(If PTD were a DSL ISP, I'd be all over their case, as there is NO legitimate reason whatsoever for ANY DSL ISP to ban servers; upstream bandwidth is limited on a per-customer basis and there's much upstream bandwidth as downstream within the ATM cloud from DSLAMs to ISP and from the ISP out to the rest of the world. In fact, the only DSL ISPs that care are ILEC-owned ".net" ISPs, who are, as always, afraid of losing their T1 and frame customers...)
-SC
Please note that it is EXPRESS customers which I understand they have high speed down, but dial-up supplies the upload path to the ISP.
--
Where am I? | |
| | | | | Maleko
join:2002-08-29
East Stroudsburg, PA | Re: amazing ProLog Express, means that you are a non-commercial cable customer. It does not mean that you are "one-way" with telco return. ProLog Express is just the marketing term for their residential cable internet service. | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: amazing said by djrobx :
Cell phones are a metered service. If you call Russia or use the phone for 20 hours, you'll get charged accordingly.
Not all of them...
Carriers that offer unlimited plans (namely Cricket and Metro PCS, and to a lesser extent ALLTEL and Nextel) still have to pay access charges to the local landline companies, and I've never heard of one of them complaining that a user is using their "unlimited" service too much...
-SC
--
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/ | |
| | | | 
mondoz
join:2000-08-26
Houston, TX
| said by djrobx :
Cell phones are a metered service. If you call Russia or use the phone for 20 hours, you'll get charged accordingly. ISPs get a tiny portion of your monthly fee, and they have to pay for the internet backbone bandwidth. Cutting off P2P uploading is the friendliest way to stop rampant bandwidth hogging and now possible legal liability, without having to pass the expense onto the customers. Would you prefer to pay-per-gigabyte?
...
-- Rob
Cell phones are usually paid for in blocks of minutes for fixed prices. It's not a very good analogy - overages must be paid for.
The local phone company one is a very good comparison,and you overlooked it. I pay a monthly fee to my local phone company - I talk as much as I want.
Have you ever heard of local telephone companies writing letters to people saying they talk too much to other local customers? | |
| | | DSL Oberst
join:2001-11-29
| "As long as a customer is not substantially hurting the ISP's network (by hacking, using excessive bandwidth by uncapping a modem or using another similar hack), the ISP should not dictate what users can and cannot do. They are providing a service-- just like cell phone companies and local telephone companies do. I can't recall the last time Verizon told me that I could not call someone on my cell phone ("upload data")-- and they won't, so long as the bill gets paid on time. Why should ISPs be any different?"
Because those who own the business in question have the right to run their business howsoever they see fit - as long as it does not violate any laws. If I run and own Earthlink entirely, for instance, and I decide that I am not going to provide any service in California, then I can do so. Boom. Down goes the accounts in California. After all, the AUP for Earthlink says I can cancel any customer at any time for any reason at my discretion.......why would I do that?
Oh, simple, I feel like it. That's all the reason you need in America for everything. I want to. The simple driving force of capitalism.....
"It seems as though more and more businesses these days have long forgotten the motto "The customer is always right". As long as someone is paying for a connection and not harming the ISP's network, the ISP shouldn't care what they do."
I'm sorry, but I have always disagreed with this opinion - and that's what "The customer is always right." saying is. It's an opinion, no more, no less.
A customer walks into a diner and because the waitress is two seconds too slow getting to him he pitches a salt shaker at her head. But hey, this is ok - the customer is always right.
In a bookstore a customer pins a clerk against a wall and screams obscenities at him two inches from his face. Why? The customer's credit card declined. But hey, the customer is always right.
In a Kroger parking lot a car is bumped by a Kroger employee bringing carts in. The bump is minor, there is not even a scratch on the car, and the employee immediately begins apologising profusely. The guy in the car comes raging out of the car and begins to beat the Kroger employee with a tire iron. But that's fine and dandy - the CUSTOMER is ALWAYS RIGHT!
Extreme examples, you say? Perhaps - but I've seen them all with my own eyes. In the last one, I was one of the guys who tackled the car driver and held him down till the police came. So this crap of "The customer is always right" is a bunch of bull; the customer is right insofar as it is within the leeway as determined by the business.
My father was a property tax consultant and retired in an extremely comfortable fashion. His method of doing business was far from "The customer is always right." Instead, his style of doing business was "Here's how I do things. If you don't like how I do things, there are other people you can take your business to." Since he had expertise in his job and he always treated people in a manner that he deemed fair, he had repeat business and continual new customers. His philosophy makes a lot more sense then yours. | |
| | | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
|
Bill1
@66.159.x.x
| Can't stand the heat, Prolog? Prolog -
If you're selling Internet connectivity to consumers, deliver unfettered service. Any filtering or throttling that would reduce the capacity or prevent services beyond the paid-for amount is unethical. It is not Prolog's responsibility to police the Internet or aid another in the pursuit or prevention of illegal activity, excepting the Government under a court order to release a customer's identity. If you choose to sell fettered access to the Internet, sell it as such. Clearly and prominently marked in the service offering field. "High Speed Access, but only in short sessions."
As far as Peer to Peer activity goes, it is no one's business but my own what I do with my computer and network connection. If I choose to distribute copyrighted material via a popular Peer to Peer client, then I, and those that choose to download data from me take the risk of being prosecuted by the copyright holder. The copyright holder has no right to tell me what software I can run on my computer, and neither do you.
Happily, I'm not a Prolog customer, but I may be subject to similar actions by my own ISP as they decide profit over professional service. Really, Prolog can sell their services however they want. I am free to choose another provider. My real gripe comes from restrictions placed on us by the incumbent telephone and cable companies, who have had taxpayer provided advantages and thus should offer common carrier services. If you have a monopoly on an area, you have a responsibility to provide unfettered access to all consumers who can pay the bill or get out of the way of other competitors.
Just give me the data pipe and leave me the be. And the rest of you self-righteous individuals are free to hold your opinions, but you best keep your hands off our freedom. As for the WiFi service provider, best advertise your limitations to your customers for the same reasons. I applaud your choice of using technical management tools to manage the flow rather than outright cut the customer off - but the customer has a right to use the capacity he pays for. If you're not forthcoming about the limitations of that capacity, you're not entitled to penalize the customer over his use of it.
Bill | |
| | 
Mr Pink
join:2002-08-21
Gainesville, FL
|  Re: amazing
[text was edited by author 2002-11-12 10:36:25] | |
| jessdub99
join:2002-05-29 | What about gamers? If they want to complain about the upstream being overloaded then they need to immediately disable all gaming too... hell, why not just get rid of upload completely! I hope cust's of this service cancel it asap. | |
| | barky
Premium
join:2001-03-17
San Diego, CA | Re: What about gamers? games dont upload all that many k's. | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| Pulled from Everquestlive.com
quote:
EverQuest Bandwidth Usage Information
This information is intended to help users and their ISPs predict bandwidth usage for EverQuest playtime. In some situations, ISPs might impose bandwidth limitations or may charge for bandwidth when a monthly/weekly threshold has been exceeded.
This information is based on averages and approximations as of October, 2001. It is important to note that there are no bandwidth limitations imposed on EverQuest, and that these numbers may increase without notice. Sony Online Entertainment, Inc. will not be responsible for any bandwidth charges incurred as a result of game play.
Currently, average play bandwidth used is 8Kbits per second, and upload averages 2Kbits per second. That comes out to 1KByte per second download, and 250Bytes per second upload from the client (player) point of view. In one hour of gameplay, a client PC downloads 3.6MB and uploads 900KB.
as you can see games use very minor ammounts of bandwidth.
--
[60 Sorcerer]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| 
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY | while they're at it... hell, why not restrict EVERYTHING? block all ports, except for 80. that'll stop piracy!
--
You're the criminal that never breaks the law. | |
| |
See 13 replies to this post | |
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| What, is email next?!? So what is next step, no sending of emails, or the ability to post on a message board..
Sound like this ISP has way oversold it's resourses and is back peddling.. Get away! Get away fast this company shouldn't even be in business.
I support botcotting it, dropping them, etc. Send them a message: WE by internet connection service to get the whole, complete internet and all it offers! | |
| | VaLUnTriAn
join:2002-11-10
Effort, PA | Re: What, is email next?!? How can you say that you buy the internet connection. If you live in an apartment to you buy the apartment...no you rent it. Same applies here, it is theirs, you are renting it. | |
| 
rchandra
Stargate S G-1 And Atlantis Fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
clubs:
| Hello, FreeS/WAN and opportunistic encryption IPv6 requires support for, but does not necessarily have to use, encryption between networking peers. Until this is adopted, in the mean time we can push for as many FreeS/WAN opportunistic encryption hosts to be put up as possible. What this means is FreeS/WAN intercepts attempts to connect to a remote host, determines if an IPSec connection is possible, and transports your data in the ESP part of IPSec if possible, and falls back to normal IP if not. To me, it's none of the ISP's damn business what is in my packets.
said by PenTelData:
-Serving files via peer-to-peer file-sharing applications encourage – and make it easy – for
users from anywhere around the world to download files from your computer as long as it’s turned on,
even if you aren’t using it, with or without your knowledge. This creates security concerns and
further consumes Internet bandwidth and taxes PenTeleData’s network unnecessarily.
In principle it's none of their damn business whether I drop all communications off the face of the Earth, or give anyone and everyone complete and full access to everything on my network-attached computer. (In practice, since someone could use a completely unprotected computer for relaying (attacks and spam), dropping all security is not practical.) I and I alone am responsible for what I let people access on my computer. Of course, if the AUP to which I agreed does not allow serving, I must act appropriately or I will be in breach of contract, but I've always been opposed to this sort of silliness. "You" are there to provide a pipe to the Internet; "you" shouldn't care how I use it, or else change some other aspect of the service package (as in, if you're worried about use of upstream bandwidth, charge me at a REASONABLY higher rate to cover your additional costs and shut up). Why are you saying it's taxing your network? Might this mean you should upgrade your network? Who are YOU to say it's unnecessary traffic? The only unnecessary traffic I know about is floods of various kinds (ping, SYN, etc.).
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules. | |
| | fenrir903
join:2001-03-07
Eau Claire, WI
clubs:
| Re: Hello, FreeS/WAN and opportunistic encryption said by rchandra :
In principle it's none of their damn business whether I drop all communications off the face of the Earth, or give anyone and everyone complete and full access to everything on my network-attached computer. (In practice, since someone could use a completely unprotected computer for relaying (attacks and spam), dropping all security is not practical.) I and I alone am responsible for what I let people access on my computer. Of course, if the AUP to which I agreed does not allow serving, I must act appropriately or I will be in breach of contract, but I've always been opposed to this sort of silliness. "You" are there to provide a pipe to the Internet; "you" shouldn't care how I use it, or else change some other aspect of the service package (as in, if you're worried about use of upstream bandwidth, charge me at a REASONABLY higher rate to cover your additional costs and shut up). Why are you saying it's taxing your network? Might this mean you should upgrade your network? Who are YOU to say it's unnecessary traffic? The only unnecessary traffic I know about is floods of various kinds (ping, SYN, etc.).
Why do people think that ISP's are different than any other business? It is their service and they can do whatever they want with it and restrict it however they want to. I would like to know where it says an ISP has to be an open pipe that you can do whatever you want with it? If you don't like it, don't buy their service. You can always buy your own connection (although most cannot afford it) and do what you want with it. You could also start your own ISP and make it into what you view as the perfect provider.
To answer your questions, THEY are the people who provide the service and make the rules. If you don't like the rules, move on out. This company knows they may lose some customers with this policy, but they apparently think they will be better off without those customers.
Matt | |
| 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| Dump Em... PTD isn't the only ISP in Nowhere, PA. Dump 'em and go with someone else. This should help solve all of PTD's bandwidth problems.
--
DRM == Doesn't Read MP3s
[text was edited by author 2002-11-07 11:53:17] | |
| | VaLUnTriAn
join:2002-11-10
Effort, PA | Re: Dump Em... Too bad he forgot to mention that PTD supplies all of those ISP's with their bandwidth. | |
| | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Dump Em... said by VaLUnTriAn :
Too bad he forgot to mention that PTD supplies all of those ISP's with their bandwidth.
That's not an issue, there are plenty of other backbone ISPs that PTD can be replaced with.
--
DRM == Doesn't Read MP3s | |
| 
antiserious
The Future ain't what it used to be
Premium
join:2001-12-12
Scranton, PA
| ... I'm not surprised ...
... I live near this company, but I wouldn't touch anything they did ... they were involved in 2 projects that I have some inside knowledge about, and both went badly ... overpriced as well ... there are plenty of alternatives, if their customers have half a brain - which is doubtful ... this is a backward, reactionary area and they just reflect this view of the world ... the radio scene here is Top-40-Retarded, unless you can catch a whiff of a weak, college station - and even then it's not great ... 2 hours north of Philly, and 20 years back in time ...
... can't wait till I can leave forever ...
--
"When a man talks dirty to a woman, it's sexual harassment - but when a woman talks dirty to a man, it's $3.99 a minute!" | |
| |
OuttaThere
@12.161.x.x | Re: ... I'm not surprised ... You got that right. I'm from just south of Sunbury... one ISP, and what's broadband. I got outta there but quick.
Pennsylvania is a diverse state. It's Philadelphia in the east, Pittsburgh in the west, and Alabama in the middle. | |
| 
MortySnerd
join:2001-07-26
Mclean, VA
| I wrote them a quick note I'm not even one of their customers, but I suggested that they use the system my school uses. My school doesn't restrict p2p, but they do make p2p second priority to www and e-mail bandwidth. This makes everyone happy, non-p2p users still get faster internet and heavy p2p users are more accurately affected by their consumption, but can still use the service. Best solution I've ever seen. If they reply to my e-mail I'll post it here.
--
This light dinner is over. | |
| |
dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI
| Re: I wrote them a quick note You actually believed their claim? Yes, if they reply pleas post it...I won't be waiting. 
These are just greedy pigs. Selling your same bandwidth that you use during the night, to some other business during the day. THey are already making large profits.
--
dnoyeB
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16
| |
| | WareWolF2k
join:2000-11-14
Allentown, PA
| said by MortySnerd :
If they reply to my e-mail I'll post it here.
Good Luck getting a reply from them! I wrote to them asking for information on their service about 2 years ago and they never even replied back, I guess they were not interested in getting new customers at the time. Now that they do want my business they come out with this policy which guarantees they will NOT get my business. | |
| jmargel
join:2001-03-07
Northumberland, PA
|  I am on Prolog
Our cable modem uplink cap is set at 70 KB/sec. This is rediculous as it is. Let along ENFORCING me to not do as I please with my connection.
When has government giving the ability to ISPs to use censorship?
If I wanna upload I shoud. I pay for the service. If I uplaod illegal software, then arrest me. Otherwise leave me & my connection alone! | |
| | Beeper
Part Of The Problem
join:2001-09-27
Dayton, OH
clubs:
| Re: I am on Prolog said by jmargel :
When has government giving the ability to ISPs to use censorship?
Dec 15, 1791, when Virginia ratified the 1st Amendment.
Business has always had the right to censor whatever it wants to.
--
Guaranteed Fear and Loathing. Abandon all hope. Prepare for the Weirdness. Get familiar with Cannibalism. | |
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Adam's cable has a pretty big PA footprint (and even some in NY state), do they overlap at all? | |
| | |
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: Very reasonable policy decision said by LiamJunket :
Every ISP & broadband provider prohibits residential customers from running servers on their networks.
For cable ISPs (and PTD is a cable ISP) I think you're right (and as I've stated again and again, I have no problems with no-server rules on cable ISPs, as they have legitimate technical grounds for having them), but for DSL you are very, very WRONG -- DirecTV DSL, Speakeasy, and Earthlink, among others, don't care (and the first two even flout it.)
The server issue is one of many reasons why I don't use ATTBI...
-SC
--
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/
[text was edited by author 2002-11-07 14:46:34] | |
| | | | | 
moiety73
join:2001-02-17
Los Angeles, CA
| said by LiamJunket :
Every ISP & broadband provider prohibits residential customers from running servers on their networks.
That is not true at all, I've had PacBell residential broadband and now have DSLExtreme residential broadband, none of which prohibited running servers. | |
| | | TheWickerMan
join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA
| Re: Very reasonable policy decision said by moiety73 :
said by LiamJunket :
Every ISP & broadband provider prohibits residential customers from running servers on their networks.
That is not true at all, I've had PacBell residential broadband and now have DSLExtreme residential broadband, none of which prohibited running servers.
And, unless they've changed their policy since I tried to get DSL (yes, tried. Long story.), Earthlink doesn't prohibit it either. They told me they don't support it, but I was welcome to try it on my own. | |
| |
teddddd
@verizon.ne | Every ISP & broadband provider prohibits residential customers from running servers on their networks.
no they dont!!! a verizon operator told me exactly how to set mine up,
philadelphia pa verizon dsl, worth every penny!! | |
| suewho
join:2002-02-15
Albany, CA | Where's My Share? | |
| TheBigZ
Premium
join:2002-11-07
Kunkletown, PA
| Some background on Prolog A little background info on Prolog, will aid you in the formations of your opinions.
PenTeleData (aka Prolog) offers internet access via cable in northeast PA, as well as some limited areas of neighboring states. I had 2way cable access thru them starting like something 7 years ago. From all I've ever been able to find out, they were amoung the first to offer 2way cable. What made that impressive at the time, was that they offered this service in some rather sparsely populated areas. Meaning they made a huge infrastructure in a part of the country where most other companies never will... just not enough potential RoI for anyone else to do it. So why did they? Welp, in at least one of the counties they cover, they have a monopoly... no other cable companies. And not just for today... barring any sort of legislation forcing cable choice, they'll hold this monopoly for most likely at least the next few decades. Granted, they also cover areas like the Lehigh Valley where they do have competition... but there's a sizable chunk of their customer base that in all reality, they just won't ever lose. So those of you suggesting they we immediately drop them as a provider for greener pastures... believe me, many of us would be more than happy to... feel free to come spend a few million to start up a new isp.
But there's more to this story. See, we Prolog customers have been suffering with less than stellar service for the last few years. From my point of view, it all started back about 4 or 5 yrs ago when they switched from the Zenith cable modem system they were using, to a docsis compliant system. It wasn't docsis itself that was a problem... the system became faster & more reliable (at least initially) once they made the change. The problem was in another decision they made. On the old system, we were paying $40/mo for the feed and $10/mo rent on the modem. When they rolled out docsis, the LOWERED the price for the feed by $10/mo. Yes... in a market where they have ABSOLUTELY NO competition, they LOWERED their price. Now I know some of you out there are just poised with you pointer over the reply button, prepared to barbecue me for suggesting that lowering prices CAN be a bad thing, but keep reading. Forget that fact that their own shareholders should want to slit their throats for doing such a thing, there's more. Since that happened, there's been what might be described as a slash & burn attack on the level of service we get. First, like a Congressional payraise done in a late night session, the downstream cap was lowered from 1meg to 800k. They didn't tell us they were gonna do it, they just did it... oh and shortly after that they raised the rate 1$/mo. At the same time (I admittedly don't know the specifics of this) the upstream has also been reduced. All this while adding more customers to the system. In our local forums, sometimes we get told there's "more than enough bandwidth" to service the customers they have, and other times (such as in the letter in question about p2p) we're lead to believe the system has become slower and less stable because people are using too much bandwidth. As customers, we've become unable to determine when we're being told the truth and when we're being lied to. The news server has also hit the toilet with a splash. What was once a notoriously reliable server, has now become little more than a large black of swiss cheese. Complete posts are all but non-existant. If you want news service, you are forced to an outside service. The email server has also become less than reliable over the last couple years. They maintain that this is due entirely to spam. They've gone to running Spam Assassin (or something like it) to solve the problem, but it hasn't seemed to help. And they subscribe to that email server blacklist thing, and some customers find they don't get all their emails. Oh, and we're not allowed more than 2 "internet devices" per account. Get his... a router or switch used to count as one of these devices! It was only after some of us went ballistic of that insanity, that they relented. But as it stands now... if you have 2 computers on the cable modem, and you get a net adapter for your XBox or PS2, guess what... you gotta lose one of the computers.
To me, this is all one big self-inflicted wound. I'm sure I don't just speak for myself when I say I would MUCH rather have kept paying the $10 more per month I already WAS paying, than to put up with these relentless reductions to the service level. Frankly, it's not blocking P2P that might someday cost them their business, it's having the fool that authorized that price reduction still around that'll do it. If I were the stockholder of a company who had themselves a monopoly for the next few decades, and they just GAVE AWAY 25% of the revenue, you can bet I'd be at the next board election. (NOTE: Yes Tom, I know PTD covers areas where there is no monopoly, but as you remind us frequently, the cable company affiliates you deal with have nothing to do with each other.) PTD has caused this problem themselves, and now they can't just raise the price again to fix it, so they're forced into stealth reductions in service levels. It's a shame that one stupid mistake has taken a company that was once on the leading edge, and turned them into just another of those companies trying to keep up. At this point, they probably have no choice but to block P2P just to keep the rest of their customer base from taking up torches & pitchforks for the lack of speed. | |
| | npyoung
join:2002-09-23
Jacksonville, OR
| Re: Some background on Prolog I suggest to you that you will never see any competition for your business in this area. The problem is that Prolog's prices are too low. I charge $400 for equipment and install, and then, our 256k/128k service is $45/mo, and goes up from there. And we aren't making a bunch of money at that rate. You folks have quite a deal going...and I don't really understand the complaining about not being able to run servers. 800kbps down? We charge $65/mo. for that--and you pay for the CPE up front, as I mentioned before. Under the pricing conditions that you have outlined, I'd never even consider going into such an area...no chance of ever making a return on one's investment. | |
| | 
Chemop
join:2001-11-12
Stroudsburg, PA
| Well I am a Prolog user myself and I agree we are getting a great deal when compared to the rest of the country. However I am deeply disturbed by what Prolog is trying to initiate here. If they are able to do this then before you know it they will be able to limit your downloads as well.
I think they should really re-think this approach or this might lead to going to other means of internet service. | |
| | WareWolF2k
join:2000-11-14
Allentown, PA
| Thanks for the review of Prolog BigZ... shame this had to happen as I am in the Lehigh Valley & was going to switch to them from RCN sometime within the next few weeks. Since I have been with RCN on one way for about 3 years. I guess I will just have to keep waiting for verizon to get DSL in this area, or for some other alternative such as internet service from the electric company. | |
| |
IMRIGHT
@ptd.net
| I would like to clarify a few things here. When you are downloading have you ever gotten higher then 300K umm... no you know why routers and lines cant handle those speeds so dont cry for being lowered to 800k for you never saw 1 meg to begin with.
Next you complain about only having 2 devices hooked up per account... I have never seen this taken into effect.
You dont seem to understand here Prolog makes the rules but doesnt really enforce them. They are trying to get you out of trouble here and you slap them in the face. blame the RIAA if you want to blame anyone.
And once again you dont like the service leave... Sign up for AOL or epix...oh wait dont go to them they get there internet from Prolog. And just wait till you install all there beautiful software on your computer and im sure you will be gald you changed | |
| | | WareWolF2k
join:2000-11-14
Allentown, PA | Re: Some background on Prolog said by IMRIGHT:
Sign up for AOL or epix...oh wait dont go to them they get there internet from Prolog.
Wow now thats something to be proud of! | |
|
0ct4vi4n
@ptd.net
| Some of you need to READ If would have read the message that was sent to prolog customers you could clearly see that they are only SUGGESTING to people to disable the upload feature in all P2P clients.
"In an effort to improve overall network performance and increase the quality of your ProLog Express
Internet service, PenTeleData will not support and strongly discourages Internet customers from using
peer-to-peer file sharing programs."
Prolog is not requiring or demanding that customers follow these guidelines. They are only suggesting to make each users connection a little better and faster.
Now Prolog is a monopoly, but a government restricted monopoly. With these restrictions they can only set certain prices. This monopoly provides bandwidth to most if not all of NorthEastern Penn. They provide bandwidth to even smaller ISP's which are also in the area. Prolog only has a couple of lines from major companys and a main line from WorldCOM. To run more lines would be almost impossible because it cost so much.
Keep this in line Prolog is trying to provide more bandwidth to its current customers to provide a better service. Not only was this a smart move by prolog, but people really can't argue with it either. When using P2P clients and having Uploads enabled it makes your computer a server. This is against terms of agreement with this company, but Prolog is allowing it even though its even in its policy not to allow it. So anyone that complains is just stupid and has no clue about computers and the business world.
Like it or not sharing files like MP3 and software that is copyright is ILLEGAL. Prolog is allowing people to transfer files as long as they don't see or hear it, So in my opinion they are giving people more privilages then should have. | |
| |
Rodimus Prime
@ptd.net | Re: Some of you need to READ I aggree with what you said but to a point. Polog is only a "monopoly" because no one has moved in yet to compete. It cant be helped that they had the money to create an isp and bone heads here dont so they call prolog a monopoly. Get a life people. | |
| |
cxdvbdx
@ptd.net
| Prolog is not requiring or demanding that customers follow these guidelines. They are only suggesting to make each users connection a little better and faster.
What is this??? I thought the new Docsis modems didn't have this problem??? But I can tell you one thing, I do!!! | |
|
The0retical
@ptd.net | You people are all ignorant. So you expect Prolog to take the lawsuit bullet for users that are doing things which are illeagal? | |
| | TheBigZ
Premium
join:2002-11-07
Kunkletown, PA
| Re: You people are all ignorant. The0retical
(anonymous noc.corp.ptd.net
Listen, all your users know that you guys take an assimilation pill every day, so that you can tout the company line without any moral dilemma... so I'm not surprised to see several .corp.ptd.net posts in here trying to defend PTD's actions & tell the world how PTD really feels about it's customer base (we're ignorant eh?). But at least fix your spelling errors when you're out representing your employer. | |
| | | auxout
join:2002-08-29
Roselawn, IN | Re: You people are all ignorant. Good deal? Maybe I'm reading the speeds wrong but thats really not that good of a deal.
I have 1.5/128 cable for $45 a month equip rental included..... | |
| | |
The0retical
@ptd.net
| Wait up a sec here. This post about how we have all been assimilated by the big bad corporate America and now we are all capitalist pigs applies to my last post how? What I asked this entire site that seems to be bashing Prolog is "Do you expect Prolog to put its neck on the line for users who are ovbiously violating their terms of agreement that they signed?"
This poses another question. Why doesn't Prolog simply turn over the people who are sharing the copies of the programs to the RIAA or the software manufactures whose software they are pirating? Prolog is doing a service to those customers who choose to steal from these companies by not turning them over to be put in jail for a felony and be sued till they are penniless. | |
| |
efvev
@verizon.ne | nah, b.s. they wont get sued | |
|
0ct4vi4n
@ptd.net
| People have no clue As a prolog employee I know how most customers feel about our services, but I also know that every person I've talked to has had no clue why certain things break or have problems. Many of you that are trying to make arguments have really no idea how most networking works. I'd have to say for the amount of business that prolog does and they way they handle their customer base is impressive.The technical is support for customers is the greatest in the area and could be even said to top larger PC makers like Dell or Gateway. Now prolog does have issues don't get me wrong, but to say that no ISP has problems is a lie.Networks break all the time and that is just the way it is.
As a person in the computer industry I know for a fact that people like to make assumptions on how everything works. Many problems that people run into aren't usually prologs fault. Many are due to poor telephone/cable lines that are in the area and also the fact that people mess-up their own computers and blame everyone else for the problem.
I have a lot of points in my last post that you might want to consider before you make judgments. If you don't like prologs services simply switch to a different provider in the area (yes there are more than one ISP in the area, ex. Epix, Enter.net, FastNet,ect.) | |
| | 
matt986634
join:2002-08-28
Dyer, IN
| Re: People have no clue "Many of you that are trying to make arguments have really no idea how most networking works."
Why should the customer be overly worried about how their service provider works? That is what you are paid for. Anybody in a specialized field, be it law or networking, often deals with customers who only have a vague idea about everything fits together and works. I am sorry that you have to deal with the occasional idiot, but almost everyone in a service based industry does as well. | |
|
knowidea
@ptd.net
| Im right I have been reading through this entire post laughing you really dont understand what prolog is talking about.
1st - you are a residential account you cant host a server...end of story you knew that when you signed up and i hate tell you but this goes for all ISP's
2nd - Prolog is getting tired of canceling accounts because dumb asses cant even P2P right...there actually looking out for your ass... and if you cancel good they where prolly where going to cancel your service anyway cause of the spiderman movie you downloaded last week.
3rd - read 1 and 2 over again... because you shouldnt have to see 3 | |
| | Astaroth30
join:2001-09-15
Allentown, PA | Re: Im right Actually, my residential ISP does allow servers.
A mute point in this case, but true
-Ast | |
|
mrslate
@ptd.net
| Wish_I_Was_Stupid As another Prolog employee I experience the complete computer illiteracy of many of our customers. Many customers just leave their their computers on and have no idea as to what is running in the background. ie: P2P applications. These customers just sit online and get file after file leeched off of them. In fact, we hear it everyday from the RIAA demanding for customer information. We try to save our customers by giving them a second chance and telling them to disable the sharing of illegal files via p2p applications. Its pretty sad that all these same customers who have no clue as to what they are doing call in complaining and trying to speak their new found "technical jargon" as to possibly boggle us with their superior mind power. Unfortunately for them, NOTHING has been changed. Prolog is suggesting these people to stop the uploading so we could alleviate the strain on the network and provide a better service to all.
With all this complaining maybe it would be better to just turn them over to the RIAA and know what real rules and sueing is. | |
| |
W4ck0
@ptd.net
| This Pretty Much Tells it Right This is taken from a post on prolog.general newsgroup ::
"I am not going to get into any discussion about this, I am going to just
state the purpose of that letter which has been take wrong by only about 1%
of the customer base from what I have seen.
Here are the facts:
A. Nothing is being changed. It is only in the maybe phase and at this
time have no plans to implement it. Hopefully just getting the word out
will take out one factor in issues that affect all cable broadband
providers, not just PTD.
B. People who have the uploading enabled on these programs are allowing
people to use the bandwidth.
B.1 and this can happen even if they are not personally using it.
C. We are just trying to get the word out that if people are not personally
actively using the upload to turn it off, as it does affect the network.
Why should we waste bandwidth on someone from say Florida when our customers
could be using it. And all because someone either forgot to turn it off
when they were done, or do not even know its on.
D. No one here at PTD is trying to tell anyone what to do with their
connection. The government not PTD sets the laws as far as copyrights and
other issues, if we get legal notice to terminate an account we will do it.
This is not a decision we make we just follow the law.
E. Your speeds that your complaining about have been directly tied to these
kinds of programs sucking down your bandwidth and its most likely being used
by someone outside our network.
F. I am not concerned at this time about the server part even thought that
is a legitimate issue. All we want is for people who are NOT PERSONALLY
using the upload part to just turn it off. It will help everyone. We
have watched the general flow of traffic and have confirmed that these
programs are causing 50% of all speed issues.
G. No we are not out of bandwidth, this is only a way to cut down unused
traffic by people who are not Prolog Customers.
H. We care about our customers and are only trying to maintain as much as
possible the best most consistent service possible, and this letter was
meant just to get the word out to people who may not even know what is
happening and to ask people who do understand to work with us on this. Use
the upload when you personally need it, but do not leave it on all the time
so the bandwidth can just be left on like a water faucet, kind of like water
conservation. Why waste it? We want it for our customers not theirs
I. If these programs are not setup right your computers could have major
security holes in them and your personal files could be available to the
world.
This is all I am going to say about this I hope this puts some peoples mind
at ease. Our main goal is to get rid of wasted bandwidth so you OUR
customers can use it.
I apologize if the intent of the letter was misunderstood in anyway."
---That sounds pretty reasonable to me!! | |
| | |
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| Re: This Pretty Much Tells it Right I'd like to address the valid concern of isps about putting "their necks on the line" where copyright is concerned.
Firstly though, it has to be admitted that this underscores that the issue is more about copyrighted content than it is about network performance. This isn't a criticism of the company but we need to be straightforward about what this is about.
Customers need to be more aware of the awkward position that isps are in. They don't want to be in this position. They don't want to be police officers monitoring their customers. I believe most would like to just let customers use their service without fussy restrictions.
Part of the reform that needs to take place is to do away with the dmca. The dmca is an abomination, including terms that allow the bullying of traffic carriers.
I do understand the dilemma that you face. Much of the time we seem to bitch about the service provider when what we are really bitching about is the perverse political and legal climate. However, I also understand that this is a case of each company rolling over because everyone is afraid to be the one to take a stand. Everyone suffers because no one is willing to be the first one to stand up and because everyone is afraid to organize a response. The long term implications for the internet, and for your business, are grave and it is desperately important that isps organize a common voice. The isp community, with the support of big players like the ilecs could be a force with power to counteract the publishing industry lobby in washington.
These issues are made all the more murky for cable companies and mega-merger monsters that have divided loyalties and contradictory interests within the company. | |
| | twid
join:2001-03-21
Santa Clara, CA
| Re: Wish_I_Was_Stupid I think posting publicly about your contempt for your customer base is a great business strategy. I know after your post and the post of the previous person from Prolog, I will never, ever do business with Prolog.
You aren't "suggesting" that people turn off uploading, you're telling them to do it or get terminated. I know if I was a customer with a service contact and you implemented this policy on me, I'd be cancelling my contract and taking you to small-claims court for bait-and-switch.
DSL and cable providers are so silly. "Here is a high-bandwidth service, please don't use the bandwidth, though".
I'll tell you what, I'm going to push for photo monitoring at every intersection in your hometown. That way, when you break the law, you will be justifiably punished. After all, you're the criminal, right? We'll also install monitoring webcams in everyone's home. People who aren't breaking the law have nothing to worry about. | |
| | | TwoGood2Btru
join:2002-11-07
Beverly Hills, CA
| WOW PTD How lame. PTD has there workers come out here and attempt to clear there tainted name and they do not even have the decency to spell check there posts before making them? Everyone better drop these clowns as soon as another ISP rolls into town because I would not put up with the half truths these cats are telling you. | |
| | | |
|
|
. I say PTD's customers should be also be proactive in helping to solve PTD's bandwidth problems... by dumping them immediately.
·
·
Very reasonable policy decision