FCC: Comcast Traffic Block Violated Rights

Cable Company Cannot Block Internet Traffic, Guaranteeing Customers Open Access Online, Rules FCC

(AP)  A divided Federal Communications Commission has ruled that Comcast Corp. violated federal policy when it blocked Internet traffic for some subscribers and has ordered the cable giant to change the way it manages its network.

In a precedent-setting move, the FCC by a 3-2 vote on Friday enforced a policy that guarantees customers open access to the Internet.

The commission did not assess a fine, but ordered the company to stop cutting off transfers of large data files among customers who use a special type of "file-sharing" software.

Comcast says its practices are reasonable - that it has delayed traffic, not blocked it - and that the FCC's so-called network-neutrality "principles" are part of a policy statement and are not enforceable rules.

Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin proposed the enforcement action and was joined by Democratic commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps in voting for approval. He was opposed by members of his own party, commissioners Robert McDowell and Deborah Taylor Tate, who both issued lengthy dissents.

The commission's authority to act stems from a policy statement adopted in September 2005 that outlined a set of principles meant to ensure that broadband networks are "widely deployed, open, affordable and accessible to all consumers."

The principles are "subject to reasonable network management," a concept the agency has not explicitly defined.

While the FCC action did not include a fine, it does require Comcast to stop its blocking practice by the end of the year. The company must also provide details to the commission on the management techniques it has used and let consumers know details of its future plans.

Martin was particularly critical of the company's failure to disclose to customers exactly how it was managing its traffic, saying this action "compounded the harm."

Martin said Comcast managers were not "simply managing their network, they had arbitrarily picked an application and blocked their subscribers' access to it."

Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice said in a prepared statement that the company was "disappointed in the commission's divided conclusion because we believe that our network management choices were reasonable...."

She said the company believes the order "raises significant due process concerns and a variety of substantive legal questions."

The FCC's action means network operators are subject to the FCC's enforcement process and the agency will act on consumer complaints.

Martin told The Associated Press in an interview before the meeting that the agency will consider fines for future violations, but he declined to speculate on how large they would be.

The FCC action arose when bloggers reported that Comcast customers who used file-sharing software like BitTorrent were noticing their transmissions were aborting prematurely.

The Associated Press ran tests and reported Comcast was indeed cutting off transfers by masquerading as its one of its customers.

The report led to a complaint by public interest group Free Press and others that the company was violating agency principles.

Comcast has said it did not block traffic, but delayed it, and only among users of the file-sharing, peer-to-peer programs that were responsible for taking up a disproportionate share of bandwidth and endangering service for other customers.

The company has pledged to stop using its network management practice by the end of the year and switch to a "protocol agnostic" technique that will not single out any particular type of user.

The action is the first test of the agency's network neutrality principles.

The enforceability of the principles have been questioned by many, including Martin, who said when the policy statement was adopted in 2005 that they "do not establish rules nor are they enforceable documents."

Members of Congress, including presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, have pushed for network neutrality legislation without success.

Large Internet service providers have fought such regulation, arguing that companies that spend billions on their networks must be free to manage traffic.

Verizon Communications Inc., AT&T Inc. and the U.S. Telecom Association all released statements saying the FCC action proved there was no need for federal network neutrality legislation.

[legacyabq]

"Then after that understand that from the half billion dollars that RIAA has collected by suing people for royalties, the amount that they have paid the artists is 50 million, or 1%, and that much only after several of the artists sued them."
is that true? What a bunch of greedy evil little pukes.

[legacyabq]

"Then after that understand that from the half billion dollars that RIAA has collected by suing people for royalties, the amount that they have paid the artists is 50 million, or 1%, and that much only after several of the artists sued them."
is that true? What a bunch of greedy evil little pukes.

[rudy654-2009]

Yeah! Kick Comcast''s rear end from here to eternity!!!

[rushlimpdrug]

Now how can comcast be censoriong anything I mean
think of the following 5 items:

[kawosa]

Relax! If your government,(US), doesn''t want you to access something on the Internet, guess what? You will not and you will not know why.
Now as far as the Comcast censorship, they have an obligation to the customer to maintain a healthy business. If you don''t like that, find another provider. This is the Bush way!

[allurfears]

It is going to be a long fight. This was just one battle. If we falter we will end up with something akin to what China laughingly calls the "internet". There will be no free flow if any information the corporations or the government don''t want flowing. This is what we must guard against.

[walt1944-2009]

It''s about time that someone sat on Comcast''s rear end and kicked them there.

Comcast is a lousy outfit to do any kind of business with. They make their money by hiring illegals fresh from wading the Rio Grande to do the "grunt work", bait you with low "introductory" prices, then TRIPLE the price after 3 months so you can''t afford it. Having been an ex-Comcast customer, I know what I''m talking about!

When the "digital revolution" come on 2/17/09, I''ll get an analog converter box and live with whatever reception I get, rather than make Comcast or AT&T RICHER!

SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!!
sig heil, ABSOLUTELY MORE OF THE SAME, "DRILLLLLL" McCain!!!!

[snelson961]

I agree comcast has gotten to big and so has the price.

[brianbwb-2009]

Google these,

RIAA seeks lower royalties for music publishers and songwriters

RIAA demanding XM-Sirius pay higher royalty rates - Engadget

RIAA: Radio needs to pay up

Then after that understand that from the half billion dollars that RIAA has collected by suing people for royalties, the amount that they have paid the artists is 50 million, or 1%, and that much only after several of the artists sued them.

This is the next organization that needs to be abolished, I say this, and I am a music producer.

[brianbwb-2009]

In case you are not familiar with it, this from Courtney Love,

It''s piracy when the RIAA lobbies to change the bankruptcy law to make it more difficult for musicians to declare bankruptcy. Some musicians have declared bankruptcy to free themselves from truly evil contracts. TLC declared bankruptcy after they received less than 2 percent of the $175 million earned by their CD sales. That was about 40 times less than the profit that was divided among their management, production and record companies.

Toni Braxton also declared bankruptcy in 1998. She sold $188 million worth of CDs, but she was broke because of a terrible recording contract that paid her less than 35 cents per album. Bankruptcy can be an artist''s only defense against a truly horrible deal and the RIAA wants to take it away.

[brianbwb-2009]

Yep, the good guys finally get one, now if we can extend this judgment to all ISPs worldwide, then we can have a truly open system of communication.

The only people who should be able to police are the police, and not private concerns that use public facilities as their media of business.

Next goal, abolish the RIAA, recover all the money it has collected, and pay the creators of the content that the RIAA has sued to collect.

[andor3]

one for the good guys and the people!

shame on Cox...

[irliberal]

YES!

Comcast LOSES! A victory for the little guy!! All right!

[comcastsux1]

Comcast, in many markets, has moved MSNBC from its analog lineup to its digital lineup 6 months ahead of the mandatory deadline for switching to all digital, and 3 months before the national presidential election. MSNBC is the ONLY cable news network that isn''t severely biased with either a corporate bias or a conservative bias. NONE of the other cable news networks (CNN, Fox "News", etc.) were prematurely moved from analog to digital... MSNBC is the ONLY one. In order to watch MSNBC''s non-conservative-biased election coverage, many people now have to rent or buy a digital converter... how many do you think are going to do that between now and February ''09, when the only news channel affected they''d need the converter for is MSNBC, and all the other channels they watch work fine without the converter??? They''ve effectively destroyed MSNBC''s ratings until February. MSNBC should sue Comcast. Comcast SUCKS!

[greeneyes222]

So why didn''t the FCC punish them?

Toothless. Guess the FCC told them.