Comcast, Pando Partner For "P2P Bill of Rights"

Bibek Paudel writes "Comcast on Tuesday announced that it would partner with Pando Networks to create a P2P bill of rights for file-sharing networks and Internet service providers. Comcast and Pando will meet with industry experts, other ISPs, and P2P companies in order to come up with a set of rules that would clarify how a user can use P2P applications and how an ISP can manage file-sharing programs running on their networks. Last month, Comcast announced that it had reached an agreement with BitTorrent whereby Comcast agreed to alter its network management practices, and BitTorrent acknowledged that Comcast has the right to police its own network. Comcast's battle with P2P networks started last year after the Associated Press published an article that accused Comcast of blocking peer-to-peer services like BitTorrent. Comcast admitted to delaying P2P traffic during peak times, but denied that any file-sharing applications were being completely blocked."

Ruh-roh

If comcast wants it... no good will come of it

Yup.

The reason Comcast wants it is because they want it for all the reason that the original Bill of Rights was considered dangerous: it will be an exclusive enumeration of all the rights you have. All other "rights" will exist at the good will of Comcast. Not to mention that I expect all kinds of weasel words in it that mean that Comcast's Bill of Rights will be nothing more than "You're allowed to use P2P for as long as we say you can, and we're allowed to change our mind at any time and without warning".

I hope this goes down in flames.

Re:

Wow - not only a very speedy Godwinism, but lumping Muhammad in with mass murderers and dictators. I do love a rational argument!

Fuck off Comcast. Users will use as they see fit!

Users will use technology as they see fit. That is the ONLY thing everyone need know.

Re:Fuck off Comcast. Users will use as they see fi

Careful...there is such a thing as an undesirable customer. Comcast could easily say, "You're costing us too much, we don't want your business." Then what?

The Findings

"Well, we've determined that information doesn't want to be free. Therefore, all BitTorrent or P2P traffic not sponsored by one of our esteemed peers will be allowed 100MB a month. Over that and your bill will go up."

Tagged: itsatrap

What makes Comcast think that will get rid of their bad reputation?

This is just posturing to look like they did something. Also, I doubt they'd put anything meaningful that didn't please Our Dearest Stockholders from on high.

Every Meaningful Phrase Gets Dragged Through Mud

I'm tired of hearing "bill of rights" applied in ridiculous situations by people or organizations who want to make it seem like they're being oppressed.

It seems to me that every meaningful phrase or term -anything that elicits a positive reaction in people- eventually gets co-opted by a political or corporate organization and turned into a complete farce. Sometimes it recovers, sometimes it doesn't.

When's the last time you heard the word "wholesome" in a BS-free situation?

Re:Every Meaningful Phrase Gets Dragged Through Mu

I'm tired of hearing "bill of rights" applied in ridiculous situations by people or organizations who want to make it seem like they're being oppressed.

Except, in this case, the people using the term "bill of rights" are the ones trying to do the oppressing. They want to use this "bill of rights" to fend off legislation (which, ironically, would be an actual BILL of rights) with actual penalties for violations.

Re:Every Meaningful Phrase Gets Dragged Through Mu

Not to mention that throwing around "Bill of Rights" tends to ignore the entire context in which that document was written... and the fact that the document almost wasn't written at all.

What bothers me so much about this is that it's a transparent attempt

Aah, the beauty of the english language.

"We haven't blocked any specific p2p applications. BitTorrent packets may have been indefinitely delayed, however."

More proprietary garbage

If you remember, Bittorrent Inc made a similar deal with Comcast to protect their transfers. Now another P2P company peddling a proprietary solution has done the same.

Where does this leave non-commercial P2P on Comcast. Are we going to see a situation where proprietary P2P is whitelisted, while everything else is throttled? Is Comcast going to move towards a protocol agnostic, but vendor specific throttling strategy?

Re:

I've been using BT on Comcast for some time now using encrypted streams. So far so good, fast transfers too. I say let Comcast throttle as much as they want, sooner or later users will adapt to using full end to end encryption rendering it basically impo

Comcast talking == NULL

Tuesday, Comcast Corporation and Pando Networks announced that they will lead the industry to create a "P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" for users and ISPs. With an FCC hearing on Comcast's anti-peer-to-peer practices scheduled for later this week, this is hardly a surprise. Once again, Comcast makes another sweetheart-sounding deal, but at the wrong time, and with the wrong sweetheart.

It takes a special kind of arrogance for a company that sells Internet Access to team up with another company that sells Content Delivery and together decide what rights and responsibilities that the world's Internet users should have.

As in its earlier "deal" with BitTorrent, Inc., Comcast's announcement tuesday doesn't change any of the facts it faces: in 2006, it assured Congress that network neutrality laws were not necessary, saying it would not "deny, delay, or degrade" its customers in order to deal with traffic congestion. Within a year it was caught secretly doing exactly that! Even after a long string of deceptive and deflective statements and tactics, Comcast continues to degrade their traffic tuesday.

As was the case in the BitTorrent "deal," neither Comcast Corporation nor Pando Networks represents the millions of customers and other members of the Internet community who were impacted when Comcast secretly launched its anti-P2P attack.

Tuesday's announcement came less than 48 hours from the US Federal Communication Committee's public hearing at Stanford University. There, the FCC heard from two panels of experts followed by public testimony on the Comcast incident specifically as well as similar industry practices in general.

And, just like in the BitTorrent deal, we also saw Comcast and Pando Networking executives start to explain why tuesday's "deal" signals that Network Neutrality regulation is not needed in the Broadband Marketplace.

Comcast talking = nothing.

This is a company with a sub-prime credibility rating.

Robb Topolski

Please include isp full disclosure!

I'm all for a bill of rights. Among the enumerated rights should be:

Any p2p user shall have available to them a detailed and complete description of what network services their monthly fees entitle them to. This will include all of the usage limits which may trigger account suspension or termination.

This information is required for any p2p user to make an informed choice among broadband providers. I don't particularly care if they advertise "unlimited" service, but there needs to be an asterisk which points to how they define unlimited.

Vote with your 'net dollars

The solution is simple: get rid of your Comcast 'net service, just keep cable. Get FIOS from Verizon or even DSL.

Comcast is a publicly traded company and as such here's what's important to them.....

Making money for their stockholders.

That means stopping the things that zap their resources. I don't think anyone will disagree that BitTorrent does exactly that.

Comcast is going to do what is best in their corporate interest. Surprised? Don't be. It's business. Vote with something they DO understand, your monthly $$$

*raises hand* I'd like to disagree

"That means stopping the things that zap their resources. I don't think anyone will disagree that BitTorrent does exactly that."

In some cases it, no doubt, does sap resources. But, let me ask you this - which is cheaper for an ISP: to move bits between use

This is a Bad Idea for Users

This is such a bad idea for users. Like 2 wolves and a sheep getting together for a democratic vote on what's for dinner - except the sheep isn't even invited to the vote.

The chances of Comcast coming up with anything that users themselves will find the least bit palatable is next to nothing, but the fools in the media and government won't hear about that because they're too busy applauding how industry is clearly now ready to take the lead and solve the problems without government intervention.

Such a transparent attempt to kill Net Neutrality, when all we as user want is: It's our pipe. We pay for it. So let us decide how we want to utilize our paid-for bandwidth. And don't make it our problem that you have oversold your system capacity by hundreds of times!

Who Speaks for You?

and BitTorrent acknowledged that Comcast has the right to police its own network.

Hey, I'm sorry but BitTorrent doesn't speak for me. They're not even a user and I am, so who died and made them God to decide what's right for Comcast and what's not?

Abbreviated version:

Don't screw with your customers packets.

Problem solved.

Bill of Rights?

A "set of rules" is a "Bill of Rights" now?

Re:Article 1:

This isn't about the legality or otherwise of the content being transferred. P2P is not only used for "infringing" content, and Comcast isn't blocking or slowing it down because someone might be transferring something illegal. Your raising of the copyright infringement issue is a red herring. The real issue here is net neutrality.

Re:

I trust Comcast in coming up with a P2P bill of rights about as much as I trust the fox in coming up with stipulations for how close it can legally get to the henhouse.

LEGISLATE IT.

Do not trust these slimeballs to police themselves.

Re:"bill of rights"? ugh...

I demand a Bill of Rights for Slashdot Trolls!

Re:

"...read through a 50 page TOS for details!

Where they *still* won't tell you how much bandwidth and throughput your money entitles you to, only that you'll be disconnected for "using too much" and/or "doing something we decide we don't like".

One other poin