Quantcast

Like An Animal: Comcast Vs. Humanity

There are some conveniences in life we just can’t seem to do without these days. Coffee vendors on every corner, a bus no more than 20 minutes away, readily available and easily downloadable videos and television shows. These are the things that set our modern society apart from the savagery of animals. Without these comforts humans may well begin eating our young. It could happen.

Cable/Internet/Phone-dominating, soul-crushing Comcast is turning us into animals. Apart from its insistence on taking over the world one enormous cable bill at a time, Comcast has recently been accused of putting blocks on online video delivery systems. Here’s what happened: Level 3 Communications, which recently partnered with Netflix, claims Comcast is charging a new fee for users wishing to stream videos or TV shows online. Explains a New York Times article, “Comcast [has] effectively erected a tollbooth that 'threatens the open Internet.'"

This obviously puts Internet video companies like Netflix at a huge disadvantage. It also threatens Net Neutrality, a term used to describe an Internet free of interference from Internet service providers like Comcast. Without regulation (as it currently stands), Comcast could legally charge additional fees or block Netflix or other video distribution companies. It could also control the streaming speeds of various videos based on its own partnerships. Interestingly, Comcast’s impending acquisition of NBC-Universal is getting nearer and nearer, providing the cable company with an increasing financial interest in having NBC’s “30 Rock” stream faster than, say, Fox’s “Glee.”

Luckily, people are outraged. Petitions are flying, articles are educating and loads of people are approaching the FCC for stricter regulations about this issue. There are no rules about this right now, but it is on the FCC’s agenda for December. We encourage you to read up, sign the petition and stop Comcast from stealing from us what actually makes us human: our freedom to unrestricted information.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@seattlest.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • TonyE

    From the background that I've read on this issue it looks like Level 3 is trying to get a bit of free ride here. Normally large backbones and ISPs work out peering arrangements so that as long as the traffic between their two networks are symmetrical they just let traffic go between them for free. However if one party starts using a lot more of the other parties resources they work out a fee arrangement. Scuttlebutt is that Level 3 just won this contract from Netflix to supply the infrastructure to carry the streaming data. They took this business away from Akamai. Akamai used to pay Comcast a fee because the traffic from Akamai to comcast was very asymmetric.

    I would think twice before being a pawn in a business dispute between three large COMPETING corporations.

  • BigGreenFrank

    THANK YOU.
    I am amazed that people can jump on this issue with barely any knowledge of the technical details.

    Level 3 has done a beautiful job casting themselves in this white shining light, but they are no internet savior. They got the Netflix contract by promising a super low price (below their competitor Akamai) and now are stuck fighting Comcast to get that price.

    Do people not understand that bandwidth is not free?

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@seattlest.com