Comcast Starts Online Video ‘Toll Booth,’ Netflix Supplier Says

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Back at the Comcast offices:

"We are losing more and more money to satellite providers, what should we do?"
"We could lower bandwidth caps on our broadband customers. That would force them to pay for higher priced plans with higher caps."
"Sounds good, do it. Anybody else?"

"How about charging from the other end?"
"Tell me more..."
"Sure. We don't only charge the customer, we charge the provider of content."
"Hmmm. Like charging the Sun for itself for providing solar power. I love it!"

"Our customers love us so much."
"No kidding, we're awesome!"

gg
gg

"But what if the our customers get mad at us and complain to Congress? After all we are still technically a franchise with legal obligations?"

"HeHe. We can take the money our customers pay us and use it to bribe, err, contribute to candidates who will let us rape, err, support the free market for monopolies"
"Great. We can give as much as we want thanks to the Supreme Court. So if we need more money to give to Congress we can just charge our customers more! It's a legitimate business expense."





btw Spidey in 5,4,3,2,1.......
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
I've never had any problems with Comcast customer service wise, but this stinks.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
What a ripoff. Consumers should punish Comcast, this is exactly what everyone said would happen sooner or later with no net neutrality laws in place. Too bad customers can't really punish comcrap because they often have no choice.
 

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,675
146
106
www.neftastic.com
Funny, the "carrier retransmission" issue has finally spilled over to the intarweb. I wonder how long it is before providers start blocking shit and running smear ads against eachother.
 

Kev

Lifer
Dec 17, 2001
16,367
4
81
I mostly came into this thread to see how spidey would spin it in favor of the ISPs
 

geno

Lifer
Dec 26, 1999
25,074
4
0
The power move to make is for Netflix to block Comcast customers...that would be epic
 

DesiPower

Lifer
Nov 22, 2008
15,299
740
126
Fuck Comcast.

They already do that regularly, they have a large porn sister concern

On a more serious note, what the eff can you do? so you live in a town that has comcast, obviously you do not have Time Warner. Your options are limited. You can opt for phone company's "high speed" internet but then your luck may run out if you are too far away from their box... Clear or other 4Gs are still in their infancy, cant get reliable service on your VoIP. So bascally have to bend over and unclench to comcast... They should basically be booked under antitrust or MRTP. They should be jailed. Or the pact between Time Warner and Comcast to not to enter in each other's area should be deemed illegal
 
Last edited:

olds

Elite Member
Mar 3, 2000
50,120
776
126
Where I live, Comcast is the only option.
I have an OLD modem. Comcast sent me a letter saying I needed to use a newer modem for that new Infinity thing they are doing. I am so uninterested, that I don't know what it is. I ignored the letters. I still get internet/TV.

I get back from vacation last night and there is a modem from Comcast here in the mail. I decided WTF, I'll hook it up even though they want me to rent it. I hook it up and they want me to install software. I try to skip that step, it won't let me.

I install their crap. I try to go online, I have to go through more steps including entering my "NT Username" and password. I think, WTF? I don't use NT. So I enter my regular Comcast username and password. They don't work. I try again after double checking that I have it right, no joy. I check the box for other paperwork. There is none with a username or password.

I remove the new modem, hook up my old one and I am back online. So much for progress.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
gee its almost like posted that this would happen in the thread about comcast winning that stupid court case
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
I'm not seeing the problem here. In a normal peering agreement you don't charge each other because you share traffic bi-directionally in generally equal amounts. If Level 3 is dumping an huge amount of traffic onto comcasts network because of video, which remember is generally one way, then that peering agreement needs to be modified with charging Level 3 for you carrying their stuffs and not offering anything in return.

This is normal internet dealings people, put down the tinfoil hats.
 

Platypus

Lifer
Apr 26, 2001
31,046
321
136
I gotta say the spin in that article is pretty goddamn ridiculous. I'm not defending Comcast in any way here but this is pretty typical peering arrangement behavior. It has nothing to do with the type of data in this case, but the amount of sent data. L3 is screaming NN to get people riled up but the fact remains they are pushing a lot more traffic to Comcast and trying to get away with not paying for it and the article is trying to spin it that Comcast is charging on the TYPE of content when in reality they are charging based on the bandwidth in general.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Here's the gem in the article and is exactly what I was talking about. Nothing more than your standard peering agreement. This has NOTHING to do with video, just amount of traffic.

Level 3 is preparing to more than double the traffic it puts on the cable provider’s network and has tried to pressure the company into accepting it for free, Joe Waz, Comcast’s senior vice president for external affairs, said in an e-mailed statement.
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
LOL - People don't understand how the internet works.

This is NOTHING to do with netflix. This has NOTHING to do with net neutrality. Just like the ESPN3 story people misinterpret the FACTS of the case because they would rather see something else that invokes an emotional response.

Comcast wants Level 3 to pay them for using THEIR network resources MORE THAN Comcast uses Level 3's network resources.

What, is Comcast suppose to say ok, we have this partnership but I am going to allow you to abuse it because you want to use our infrastructure instead of building out your own? LOL.

Just because Level 3 provides infrastructure to Netflix and now Comcast wants them to pay up DOES NOT mean that Comcast wants a video 'toll booth'. The two are completely unrelated. You could substitute Netflix with a SPAM company and the same thing would be happening if the volume of data was the same.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
More explanations here...again, understand how the internet works, this has NOTHING to do with netflix or video and just amount of traffic in a particular direction.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1929035/comcast-level-argue-internet-traffic

If what Comcast is saying is true, and Level 3 is asking for an uneven allocation of data transit on its network, then one can understand why Comcast is levying a charge on Level 3. The underlying question is why has Level 3 asked Comcast to handle more traffic? For decades peering has generally worked on the basis of a fair sharing of traffic and given Level 3's position as a Tier 1 network, it is Comcast that needs Level 3 in order to maintain high quality Internet connectivity for its customers.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
I'm not seeing the problem here. In a normal peering agreement you don't charge each other because you share traffic bi-directionally in generally equal amounts. If Level 3 is dumping an huge amount of traffic onto comcasts network because of video, which remember is generally one way, then that peering agreement needs to be modified with charging Level 3 for you carrying their stuffs and not offering anything in return.

This is normal internet dealings people, put down the tinfoil hats.

not at all.

you are providing bandwidth to comsumers who pay for

they are not charging level 3 because they are already charging US. do they charge a radio station that steams? what about youtube? cnn?

its double charging no matter how you look at it.

they are providing a service you use that you pay for, then charge them anyways?
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
not at all.

you are providing bandwidth to comsumers who pay for

they are not charging level 3 because they are already charging US. do they charge a radio station that steams? what about youtube? cnn?

its double charging no matter how you look at it.

they are providing a service you use that you pay for, then charge them anyways?

Huh?

Comcast isn't trying to charge Netflix so why do you bring up content providers.

It is the VOLUME of data not the TYPE of data that Comcast wants to charge for.

If you use more electricity do you not get charged more?