RSS
Twitter
Comcast Has Quite A Week: Gets In Trouble For Blocking Content And For NOT Blocking Content
from the can't-win dept
It's been quite a week for Comcast, hasn't it? First, under a baseless legal threat from Andrew Cuomo that it was not blocking certain objectionable content, Comcast caved and agreed to start blocking that content. Then, just a few days later, the FCC (as was widely expected) concludes that Comcast violated its "open internet" guidelines by blocking certain content. So, apparently, the mixed message lessons of the day for Comcast: it's okay to block content when the government says so (with no legal basis), but it's not okay when you block stuff yourself (or so says the government, perhaps with no legal basis). Whatever you may think of the results of all of this, you'd have to forgive Comcast for not particularly liking politicians meddling in its services.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
Good to see that Comcast got nailed on this issue, although Cuomo should work on removing his head from his ass before he worries about other things.
First.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Yes.
And then no.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Err...
Yeah, well it is Comcast's fault for providing service to such a branded community.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Branded Community & Shell Entities
Branded Community,
Shell Entities.
Comcast sucks, they suck big Shell Entities
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Comcrap Branded Community of comcast.
A Shell Entity of CORPORATIONS which are nothing but a bunch of Patent trolls roaming the Earth.
I can't wait for the day that politicians understand the difference between "For the People... " and "For the Corporations... "
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Marios' Little Boy
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Marios' Little Boy
It would be ironic if Comcast turned around and told Marios' little boy to pound sand
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Don't Blame Comcast
Comcast is just trying to abide by all the laws, including the ones no one knows about that are just hanging around so someone can be sued or fined. Cuomo is the dumbass here, if anyone should be in trouble/fined/slapped on the wrist it should be Cuomo.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Don't Blame Comcast
Cuomo is definitely a dumbass but I still don't think that excuses Comcast.
First of all, Comcast caved into Cuomo's threats despite them not holding any water, regardless of what adverse affect it might have on their customers (after all, no filter is perfect). Had Comcast refused to respond, Cuomo wouldn't have had a leg to stand on and they wouldn't have made themselves look terrible to all of their customers.
Second of all, that definitely doesn't excuse Comcast's history of filtering their customer's connections. I actually prefer having a slower, yet less restricted, DSL connection (3Mbps/512Kbps) than having a fast yet questionable cable connection (when I lived in Maryland, I got 8Mbps/1Mbps through Comcast but found myself completely unable to seed legal torrents until I put a heavy-handed firewall between my network and theirs).
Long story short: yes, I blame Comcast.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The spread of child porn, music and film that violates copyright, and hate speech NEED to be the collaterally damage that is experienced in order to insure liberty and freedom. Karma will take care of the violators in the long run.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
yup... they will be the politicians of tomorrow, so better get ready to kiss our asses now. Pucker up buttercup!!
The idea that you feel that file sharing is somehow violating freedom, and the pursuit of happiness is hilarious.
Be careful how you use the term violators. I'm sure that there are things that you do in your daily routine that I can find laws against. Such as spitting outside, having sex in any position other than missionary, oral sex, being naked in front of your children, etc. The list goes on and on. Granted, I have no idea where you live, but I bet it is in the US. So be careful how you use words... Karma has way there too.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
"The idea that you feel that file sharing is somehow violating freedom, and the pursuit of happiness is hilarious."
That statement sir makes you a moron.
It isn't file sharing that's the true complaint its the illegal tactics used to catch those people. Such as coming into their homes to take their computers based on false information to sue them.
The RIAA is responsible for so many illegal activities its not even funny. How many people have they sued based on false information? They demand information from your ISP (personal information...who the hell do they think they are to ignore the fact that they would need a warrant to do such a thing) and meanwhile their actions are ignored by the government because...tada corporate america. Its total crap and I can't wait for the day it happens to you while your scratching your balls trying to figure out wtf is going on.
I'm not without complete sympathy for you though as you just simply do not have a clue.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
NetCo blowback
While Cuomo is wrong and bad on this, it's been the cablecos that bribed, lied, and cheated to fight being common carriers the way the old telephone companies are/were. If Comcast and the rest want to avoid dilemmas like this, all they have to do is get laws passed that make them common carriers with no responsibility for, and no control over, content.
Until then, screw 'em. They're no martyrs to free and open information -- they and their colleagues are the core of the problem.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
security, etc.
It's interesting to me that so often we are so far behind the curve on so many legal issues because of the quick expansion of the Internet, yet this is the type of item that makes the radar. I think the back-and-forth of this particular suit definitely illustrates how copyright laws, content laws, etc. as they have always existed in the past need to be revised to account for the complexity of the Internet (and how often current laws don’t really quite fit the nature of the Internet). I don't know that at this point it's possible to catch up with technology in terms of different laws, yet I'm also not sure how they’re going to revamp laws and make them airtight to make sure there is no confusion. I guess it will be interesting to see which other stories unfold.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
tankyo..
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment