Comcast Must Pay $16M For Blocking P2P Traffic

[enforcer22]

[citation][nom]sliem[/nom]Ha! Pirates win another battle.[/citation]


if thats what you get out of this then your one of the idiots that could have thier rights taken away and not even care.

if your also one of those idiots who thinks p2p was made to pirate (even if it mostly gets used that way) please stuff it in your.......

 

[nebun]

well this is what happens when a big company like Comcast decides to cheat it's customers. greedy phuckers, let the people get what they pay for, wtf?

 

[nebun]

almost forgot, it should not be at the discretion of the ISP to decide how a subscriber is going to use the services he or she is paying for. if they are going to advertise unlimited services then let it be unlimited and at the speed the customer is paying for. here in GUAM my ISP needs to get a lawsuit like this one. i pay for a crappy 7.0 Mbs and only get between 2.0 - 4.0Mbs most of the time. i tell them that they are capping my speed and they say that they don't, i am not that stupid

 

[Guest]

they are probably blocking traffic still regardless of proto as my dsl bounces all over the place from what signed on for to half of that[and excuses like excess traffic and such don't hold to good just like the gas companies and their cohorts excuses]

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Gee! Another case of deceptive advertising used to generate revenue!

 

[rage machine]

I've always found it odd to hear of many people getting throttled. I have charter communications and i have yet to be throttled after even several hours of downloading at 650kb/sec and uploads around 150kb/sec.

 

[saint19]

jajaja, the free world isn't too free. Well, at least they must pay.

 

[formin]

$16M is pocket change to comcast
they have almost 16M subscribers
16M x $50/month x 12 monthes = just under $10Billion a year
thats the same as someone making $60,000 a year being fined 100 bucks

 

[satoshen]

Aren't there legitimate uses for P2P, such as Skype? In some markets, Comcast is really the only viable internet provider. They need to be regulated like this much the same way the phone company is. Although its a slap on the wrist, its a victory for net neutrality. All I can say is Verizon, PLEASE, bring your Fios service to metropolitan Seattle so we have some viable alternatives!

 

[rooket]

250gb cap sucks, especially when you have more than 6 megabit pipe. sueing over p2p? feh...

 

[pale paladin]

Comcast is a good service provider but they should have in writing any service limitations. I do feel though that limiting downloads and having caps is a good thing. Cable internet service can be influenced by bandwidth hogs in a given neighborhood. I should not have to fight for bandwidth to play Games or watch a movie with someone torrenting 1TB of shit each Week. That is why I now have DSL 12mb

 

[DAK_59]

That probably gets divided up as $15,999,900 for the lawyers and $100 for the Comcast customers.

 

[Guest]

The only people that get anything off these class action lawsuits are the attorneys.