Comcast Says FCC Has No Authority To Stop Traffic Shaping

from the lawsuit-already-shaping-up dept

Thu, Mar 20th 2008 1:26pm — Mike Masnick

This probably won't come as much of a surprise, but Comcast is now suggesting that the FCC doesn't have the authority to regulate its traffic shaping activities. This comes in response to Kevin Martin suggesting that the FCC would rule against Comcast for traffic shaping (which seemed odd enough, considering that Martin was perfectly fine with AT&T traffic shaping). Comcast is already suing the FCC over its telco favoritism, so this might just be one more thing to toss on the pile.

It's tough to know who to favor in this situation -- but Comcast may be technically correct that this extends beyond the FCC's authority. Still, it might not be good policy for the company to say so, considering the efforts being made to put in place net neutrality legislation. If supporters of this legislation notice what Comcast is saying, it might just explicitly add language to the bill to give the FCC the authority that Comcast now says it doesn't have. So, even if Comcast is right, saying so out loud may not have been the wisest move at this juncture.

Filed Under: authority, fcc, net neutrality, traffic shaping
Companies: comcast, fcc

13 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Network Admin, 20 Mar 2008 @ 2:14pm

First?
WHoo hoo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Woadan, 20 Mar 2008 @ 2:15pm

An ironic outcome would be for the court to rule that the FCC was allowed to watchdog network neutrality, but if it will, it must apply the rules fairly and evenly to all broadband providers.

Will K-Mart do it to annoy Comcast but in turn annoy his telco buddies? Or will K-Mart leave Comcast alone to keep peace with his telco peeps?

Nosy, er, inquiring minds want to know!

News at 11!

Woadan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Godeater, 20 Mar 2008 @ 2:26pm

Comcast can try what the might, we will reroute them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nicko, 20 Mar 2008 @ 3:12pm

telecommunication carriers
It all comes down to how one interprets the definition of 'telecommunication carrier'. The telecommunications acts specify rules for exchange carriers, telecom carriers, broadcast services, and cable services. In the 1996 acts it was pretty simple, if you sell phone services your in telecom, if you push media via radio you abide by broadcast rights, and if you pushed media via cable you were a cable service.

But now what services you offer have nothing to do with the medium you offer it over. So what about TV over copper trunks? Phone over cable? Do you have to abide by all the rules then, or is it differentiated by medium or by service?

The 'Telecommunication Acts of 1996' need to be ratified by the 'Digital Media and Content Services act of 20XX' whenever someone gets around to writing one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2008 @ 3:35pm
  
  Re: telecommunication carriers
  Better get started!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sparkplug, 20 Mar 2008 @ 3:58pm

What's traffic shaping?
It's it like body sculpting? Or is it more like Censorship Lite. Now 98% free of things mid-westerners find offensive!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bryan Price, 20 Mar 2008 @ 4:27pm

Predicted this week.
Brett Glass already predicted this:
from Dave Farbers IP list.

And I'm not the only one who has made that argument. Comcast and other providers are already preparing to sue if the FCC attempts to appropriate our bandwidth for P2P -- which, ironically, is overwhelmingly used for criminal activity.

Of course, Brett comes off like a screaming child in his little rant, and there are a couple of good responses in that thread if you care to read them.

And yes, Brett throws Comcast into the fray, as if he's sure that this is going to happen. How he knew would be an interesting question.

And calling P2P overwhelmingly criminal? Since when did a civil offense become criminal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brett Glass, 29 Mar 2008 @ 8:33pm
  
  Re: Predicted this week.
  Actually, it is the P2Pers, who want their pirated music and video at zero cost and won't tolerate a moment's delay in getting them, who might be said to be screaming like children. I'm simply advocating reasonable network management practices. And I am neither screaming about it nor slandering others, as you attempt to do to me above.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brett Glass, 12 Jul 2008 @ 9:26pm
  
  Re: Predicted this week.
  Mr. Price, it's you who comes off like a screaming child -- and also an ignorant one. Title 17, Chapter 5, Section 506 of the US Code states that copyright infringement is a criminal offense if one reproduces or distributes (among other things) more than $1,000 worth of material. So, indeed, P2P (which was invented, by the way, for the purpose of infringing copyrights) is virtually always used for criminal activity.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Mar 2008 @ 6:43pm

That's Comcrapic
Now when the talking heads say "See you later' they mean it.

http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://tinyurl.com/2usdx4, 21 Mar 2008 @ 4:09am

http://tinyurl.com/2usdx4
http://tinyurl.com/2usdx4
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a-roid, 31 Mar 2008 @ 10:26pm

f comcast
Comcast is a monopoly. I hope the FCC shuts them down. They get paid Billions through, advertisement/commercials....and then they charge a $50 dollar minimum for a FEW channels. Funny we have to pay to watch TV. The Billions they make in advertisement. Remember when you could watch a TV without cable,,,,,,free of charge? You still can...good luck seeing through all the snow even with an antenna. Yup, comcast has complete control, so much that you can't get a clear picture without cable..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A, 7 Apr 2008 @ 8:47am

comcast internet email access
it's really bothering me, that i have to always open the main page comcast.net in order to access my email at work. every time i do that it opens all this commercial page with ton's of junk 2 times (not ones) , in order to get to my email ( i already pay them 50 bucks for internet ). it's annoying to open all that junk just to get to my email during the work hours, and my boss bypass behind, and think i am checking out what j.lopez had for breakfast. i use to open www.comcast.net/login, and it work to skip that, but they figured it out lately, and they reroute you to their stupid main page. anyone has any tricks for this ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]