said by en102 :

Filtering / eavesdropping on my connection will keep me from signing any business (personal or other) with AT&T.

While I might have applauded AT&T for attempting to do FTTN as a viable product (jury is still out), playing buddy with NSA, on my calls is obviously not appreciated, and content filtering /deep packet inspection of my traffic is even worse.

said by MattE :

Given the fact that AT&T transfers the majority of the internet backbone traffic, you may not have a choice, no matter WHO your ISP is.

said by jester121 :

But most of the companies that actually ARE wholesale customers of AT&T WOULD welcome this -- less bandwidth to purchase from AT&T (thanks to thwarting pirate bandwidth hogs) = a few more months in business.

Why do you think they would defect en masse?

said by odog :

Because your customers would defect from you. If I was a customer of an ISP, and my ISP only used AT&T for their internet connection my customers would get mad at me for not being able to use P2P. Also if you are a business level customer you buy raw, naked internet, with no restrictions.

said by jester121 :

Plenty of small businesses wouldn't mind AT&T filtering potentially illegal traffic from their network; it saves them some expense in installing filter/block software.

It all comes down to which direction the market takes. I'd say the vast majority of customers are going to shop price and speed, and if they find out afterwards that P2P doesn't work, they'll get over it.

said by nutcr0cker :

"I hate thieves."

LOL...Even the Air that you pollute, you are stealing from you children...ironic isn't it

said by ninjatutle :

I don't have children. I hate them too.

said by Ahrenl :

And before you bring the utility argument, please understand that it is not possible to get a job that pays above the poverty level without an internet connection. At least not in the Urban/Suburban areas.

said by Ahrenl :

There are no laws for what content AT&T can allow on their networks. In fact, as long as they have universal carrier status, they're not even responsible for illegal content on their network.

The only issue is that filtering content might remove their universal carrier status, thus making them libel for illegal content. But, under law, they can block ANYTHING they want. They could make it so that customers could ONLY get to the ATT.net portal if they chose.

said by Ahrenl :

And before you bring the utility argument, please understand that it is not possible to get a job that pays above the poverty level without an internet connection. At least not in the Urban/Suburban areas.

Filters that block content of course don't make more content available -- but such is the reasoning of DC lobbyists.

said by jc100 :

ATT wants immunity from eavesdropping

ATT wants to filter and mine your data

What next? The ATT we want access to your PC policy to make sure nothing on there harms the company in any way? Better yet, how about the ATT banking records division. If we know your financial details, we can assess how much to charge you for broadband. If we find you are rich, we'll raise your price.... This company disgusts me.

I hope this immunity crap is NOT passed in congress. If it is, Americans can kiss their rights goodbye FOREVER. It'll be the final nail in the coffin signing away our freedoms to companies. Basically, this legislation will serve as the open door policy to allow businesses to do as they please. If the immunity does not pass (high doubt), then this action will open ATT for more lawsuits. What happens if they filter the upload of a home video, and cause it to be lost in transmission? What happens if a company's data gets corrupted because a filter suspects it's a pirated file? The sky is the limit and so are the problems with ATT.

said by jc100 :

I hope that's irony and not the truth... However, ATT isn't far from this bit of sarcasm. If they keep this up, they'll require your banking account and remote access to your pc. Then they will have everything they need to destroy your lives, in case they find something they deem questionable. Ah yes, Corporate America screwing the customer. Where have I heard that before.... Tyco.... Enron.. Woldcomm.... Etc.

said by iEvolution :

Lets ask the gun manufacturer's to control what usage their weapons can be used for!

While we are at it lets ask OTC drug companies to control how we use drugs too. Better enforce the directions on the bottle!

said by LeeWL :

Then move on to cars. The fastest speed limit I know of in the US is 75. So, lets just slap an artificial limit of 75 on every car, coded right into the chip. Better yet. We can hook up a nationwide transponder system so that the car will only ever go the speed limit for that road.

said by moschops :

If they start filtering "pirated content" it is only a mater of time before they decide to start filtering "illegal content". But "illegal content" is whatever the courts say it is that week.

said by mlcarson :

Why don't they put this filtering technology to good use by filtering SPAM and virii as it enters their network? People might actually support something like that.