Class action lawsuit filed against Comcast
By Jonathan Schlaffer
It should come as no surprise that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Comcast regarding the speed of its service. Gilbert Randolph, LLP has filed the suit in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of a client and the residents of the District.
The complaint alleges that Comcast is supposed to provide the “fastest Internet connection” and “unfettered access to all the content, services, and applications that the Internet has to offer.” The firm alleges that these claims are false because Comcast impedes access to P2P (peer to peer) applications.
When it comes to P2P applications, Comcast isn’t exactly the forgiving type. The company supposedly sends “reset packets” which that tell the transmitting computer(s) to stop sending data. Therefore, “users of peer-to-peer applications are denied full access to the Internet despite paying for a service that Comcast promises is “unfettered” and the “fastest” available.“
A spokesperson from the firm said that the company claims it does not block access to any applications but that’s not the case. It’s not so much the fact that the company is doing this but that it does so in an “underhanded and deceptive manner.”
The plaintiff in the case, Dr. Snider, said, “I’ve been a Comcast customer for several years, and I feel betrayed.” A lot of other customers are right there with him, for the same or different reasons.
The company was adamant that it does not block or throttle P2P traffic in any way shape or form. It finally admitted said actions to the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) but did not reveal the extent of those activities.
Comcast claims that it does so because P2P applications place additional burdens on its network and named BitTorrent as one of the main offenders. BitTorrent called the actions by the company, “anti-competitive.”
Now that Comcast has attracted the attention of the court system, the FCC and Congress, maybe it will change its way. The Executive Director of the Open Internet Coalition, Markham C. Erickson, ended by saying, “if Comcast doesn’t change its behavior, the word ‘Comcastic’ is going to become a synonym for fraud.”
It’s Comcastic alright, but not in the way Comcast meant it. The problem is that if you live in an area where Comcast service is offered, it’s unlikely you have any other choices for a service if you want all three (phone, Internet, cable). It seems the company also has a way of locking out competition too, perhaps that should be brought up in the case as well.
Related:
Stumble It!
Entry was posted
on Thursday, February 28th, 2008 at 9:54 am
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by Jonathan Schlaffer.
March 13th, 2008
I am pleased to hear about this lawsuit filed against Comcast. I now have Comcast for all three services and I looking into what can be done regarding them selling customer phone numbers and possibly the “lock-out” of competition. I have had their phone service for six days. NO ONE has the phone number, YET I have received four calls from telemarketers asking for me or my husband. Too say that I am livid is an understatement…did I mention that the number is unpublished!! I’ve read other blogs online and apparently this has been happening for some time. Something needs to be done about Comcast.
June 2nd, 2008
I have comcast and am unable to use Skype because of this, is there a way to join this class action? I am in Chicago
June 4th, 2008
had service for 20 days canceled due to poor picture and service dropping intermittently. refused to pick up dish that they installed on my roof wanted me to pay $100 for them to pick it up and wanted me to sign a waiver if there are holes in my roof. Well of course there will be holes since those idiots drilled into the roof. I wnat the damn dish gone and repair to my roof.
June 4th, 2008
had service for 20 days canceled due to poor picture and service dropping intermittently. refused to pick up dish that they installed on my roof wanted me to pay $100 for them to pick it up and wanted me to sign a waiver if there are holes in my roof. Well of course there will be holes since those idiots drilled into the roof. I wnat the damn dish gone and repair to my roof. I am in Texas
June 25th, 2008
I want to join the class action aginst comcast. A news story with information on this would be very helpful.
July 29th, 2008
Comcast stole my money and terminated my services, their contact is misleading and they are the big dog and they always win.
September 29th, 2008
I’d love to see this case extended to also take a look at the unfair practice of ISPs, especially Comcast, barring its users from running servers on their connections. Considering how much I shell out to them per month, I should be able to host whatever I want on my own equipment, and it should be illegal for them to tell me any different.
I would personally testify to the fact that Comcast is anti-competitive, in part because of their AUP (acceptable Usage Policy), but mostly because of the underhanded practices of their NOC staff. Blocking ports should only be done upon a customer’s request, never because the ISP has decided to do it for you. I run an email server (a legitimate Exchange server for my technical community), along with a small webserver farm, and a series of Linux based chat servers (running UnrealIRCD & TeamSpeak Server). So far, comcast has blocked my email server twice, the 2nd time being after I had taken meassures to ensure that there was no erroneous port 25 traffic (gathered by running ‘tcpdump port 25′ from my Linux based edge router). As a senior network administrator myself, I know what they are doing, and it should be illegal. For that matter, the AUPs of most ISPs here in the USA should be called into court. These companies are raking in billions per year on their services, and you can’t tell me that they can’t afford to continually upgrade to keep up with increasing demand. They just released an addendum to their AUP which goes into effect on October 1st, 2008, which creates a 250GB cap per user. 250GB seems like a lot. Try running a tech shop on a 250GB cap. Not to mention, with more and more real-time video streaming sites, video conferencing communities and such developing at a steady rate, how long will it be before Comcast is forced by need to re-examine this 250GB cap as being far too little for the average user, much less, the power user.
What kills me the most is that Comcast advertises their service as ‘The one for power users’, but with this new 250GB cap, what they’re doing is charging us more to run out of our alotment more quickly.
If only there were another choice… but,if you want Broadband in Little Rock, AR, you have to deal with either AT&T or Comcast’s duapoly.