FCC: We'll investigate Comcast-BitTorrent flap

Federal regulators plan to investigate whether Comcast improperly interferes with BitTorrent and other file-sharing traffic on its network.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin

(Credit: Federal Communications Commission)

The announcement by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin arrived in a panel discussion at the annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, according to an Associated Press report Tuesday.

Since at least last summer, reports had been circulating that the cable company was throttling BitTorrent traffic, which Comcast promptly denied. But in October, the AP released the results of tests, based on attempts to download the King James Bible, which it said confirmed that Comcast was actively interfering with the practice.

The flap drew protests to the FCC from pro-Net neutrality groups, which said the incident clearly demonstrated the need for new regulations prohibiting prioritization of Internet content.

Marvin Ammori, general counsel for Free Press, which backed that complaint, said he was encouraged by Martin's statement at CES. "The FCC must stop these would-be gatekeepers and fine companies that censor the free flow of information," he said in a statement.

Comcast's defense all along has been that it is only taking "reasonable" steps to manage the functioning of its network so that its users get the best possible service.

"The question is going to arise: Are they reasonable network practices?" AP quoted Martin, a Republican, as saying. "When they have reasonable network practices, they should disclose those and make those public."

[cidman2001]

Bandwidth Throttling from Charter

It's about time someone has taken notice of this sleazy practice. Comcast isn't the only company throttling bandwidth. Charter Communications uses Ellacoya equipment to throttle voip and file-sharing traffic.

I think using bandwidth throttling is fraudulent. This notion that 'taking "reasonable" steps to manage the functioning of its network so that its users get the best possible service' is nothing more than a smoke and mirrors way to say "We're not going to invest in the network to ensure that everyone gets the bandwidth advertised."

For instance, in my area, Charter just bumped everyone who had 3meg service to 5meg. In reality the "spped boost" did nothing for Voip and file-sharing customers because they're being throttled. It's not up to the ISP to determine what type of legal traffic I'm generating, but they are responsible to deliver the bandwidth they advertise.
This is a classic case of false advertising as far as I can see it.......

I hope Congress and the FCC will make sure this practice is punished as harshly as file-sharers get....

[dargon19888]

Its Comcast's network...

This has got to be the worst example of government interference with an ISP.

Its the ISP's network they have a right to control the type of traffic that is carried over their network.

You don't like the quality of service? Then leave.
That simple.

[directorblue]

Martin's a former telco guy - of course he'll investigate Comcast!

Martin's quite a character, isn't he?

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/12/700-mhz-and-tim-wus-wireless.html

[LarryBowler]

And the FCC will.....

be a waste of time for everyone.

I agree with Raynovich* "the FCC has been a disaster ever since Reed Hundt convinced us that loading up telecom companies with debt through wireless spectrum auctions was a good idea."

*http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=466&doc_id=140252

[libertyforall1776]

Comcast should disclose, but it is private, hence free market

Comcast should disclose what it is dong, but it is a private
business/network and has the right to do what it wants, hence
free-market, and we have the right to select one of their
competitors which does not do such things!

Go Ron Paul 2008 -- the free-markets President!
http://ronpaul2008.com

[astormchaser]

A nice compromise already exists for ISPs

The solution for Comcast or any ISP is quite simple. NEVER make judgements on what type of traffic is acceptable or not. I think it is this playing "god" role that riles people and customers. An ISP can simply allocate bandwidth resources based on usage patterns without invading privacy. Much the same way a power company meters gas. (they don't tell you what you can cook on your stove?)

As for Bittorrent the problem is generally that these applications open up hundreds of connections to the Internet. Too many internet Connections can bring down a Network , I have diagnosed this problem all the time for my customers.

To resolve it comcast could simply provide each customer with a fixed number of connections to the internet as well as a total amount of throughput (which they already do) This would not single out Bittorrent but rather the resources that a Bittorrent uses. The result would be the same ... Bittorrents might run a bit slower; however there would be no need for the ISP to look at traffic, simply just monitor the Internet resources used.

Although this may sounds like it is the same thing
as just straight out limiting Bittorrent it is quite different.

Think of the Internet as a community resource, if one person in the community is using more than their share most people would agree something should be done about it.

I personally don't like the government telling me not to water my lawn on Tuesdays, I'd much rather have them tell me if I use too much water they will shut me off. So if Comcast would adopt a policy of limiting total connections per user I think they would solve this issue without controversy. Limit the resource NOT the application!

Art Reisman
CTO
www.netequalizer.com