Joe Greco wrote:
> Well, because when you promise someone an Internet connection, they usually
> expect it to work. Is it reasonable for Comcast to unilaterally decide that
> my P2P filesharing of my family photos and video clips is bad?
>Comcast is currently providing 1GB of web hosting space per e-mail
address associated with each account; one could argue that's a
significantly more efficient method of distributing that type of content
and it still doesn't cost you anything extra.
Wow, that's incredibly ...small. I've easily got ten times that online
with just one class of photos. There's a lot of benefit to just letting
people yank stuff right off the old hard drive. (I don't /actually/ use
P2P for sharing photos, we have a ton of webserver space for it, but I
know people who do use P2P for it)
The use case you describe isn't the problem though,
Of course it's not, but the point I'm making is that they're using a
shotgun to solve the problem.
[major snip]
Again,
flat-rate pricing does little to discourage this type of behavior.
I certainly agree with that. Despite that, the way that Comcast has
reportedly chosen to deal with this is problematic, because it means
that they're not really providing true full Internet access. I don't
expect an ISP to actually forge packets when I'm attempting to
communicate with some third party.
... JG