RoadRunner Blocking Use of Kazaa 659
An anonymous reader submits: "You should know that RoadRunner is quietly blocking the use of Kazaa in
certain markets. Particularly in Texas, they have some sort of port scanner
in place which scans for Kazaa activity and then disables use of that port,
rendering the program completely useless. Grokster, iMesh, and all other
FastTrack programs are similarly affected. Yet RoadRunner is not disclosing
the practice in any way. Not only that, I'm troubled by the possibility of
them arbitrarily choosing to block other programs in the future. If this
becomes more widespread, they will have many angry (and former) customers." The poster provides these four links to forum postings with more information: one;
two;
three;
four.
Legality (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't have a contract handy, so if it's covered so be it; But if it _is_ in your contract then maybe you should re-think who you pay $50 a month.
Re:Can they do this? (Score:3, Interesting)
They have the technical ability to do it, obviously. The contracts can generally be changed by the ISP at will, so it would seem that it's legal or can be made to be legal quite easily. Does it make business sense? That largely doesn't matter if you are the only broadband provider in the market or if every other available provider is doing the same thing.
IMHO, cable companies are more likely to be in bed with MPAA/RIAA entities than phone companies, and DSL providers seem to be 'freer' in general about running servers, so perhaps you'll be able to find respite with them if RR starts pulling this in your neck of the woods. This is going far beyond their responsibility to copyright holders, and I'd seek an alternative that understands that being an ISP is about providing a pipe, not spying on your customers. We've got plenty of others doing that already.
Road Runner Annoyances.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I think they should disclose this stuff. But I think the reason they don't is because, they know there is ligitment uses for this app, tho (and lets be honest) many (not all) people do not use it for thoes ligitment uses. It kinda reminds me of the dialup days and when napster was getting bigger.. ISPs use to add "This is not a dedicated dialup connection, you can only be connected x amount of hours (usually 300 or so) per month" to their terms of service. Now its kinda like saying "You have a dedicated connection, but you can't do this and this and this or that.." oh wait.. they already say it.. *sigh*
If your not gonna let me do what I want with my $50.00/mo, then atleast let me upgrade.. Mabey they assume non-business customers wanting business bandwidth will only use it for warez/hax0ring?
Re:So for $20 extra bucks... (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder how much extra it would cost for them to simply carry generic data.
-
Re:Legality (Score:2, Interesting)
Road Runner AUP [cablelinc.com]6. Customers are strictly prohibited from running server-based applications on Residential Road Runner accounts. This would include, without limitation to the running of HTTP Web servers, FTP servers, Gaming servers, SMTP and POP Mail servers, Domain Name Servers, Chat servers, etc.
When a business tells you one thing and then does something completely different after you become a subscriber, are there ever any consumer protections that kick in?
Re:What to do??? (Score:5, Interesting)
That way they can run uncapped cable modems. Infrequent users get maximum speed and transfer rates, moderate users get moderate transfer rates, and heavy users (eventually) get slow transfer rates.
To avoid a congested high speed consumption situation, resets of the rates are done on a rolling basis so everyone has a different monthly reset. A web page should give you your current stats (up, down traffic, current speed cap, amount transferred, reset date etc.)
That way everyone can be happy, running servers or p2p apps, and if they want to use up all their high speed bandwidth they can be stuck with modem like speeds for the rest of the month without suspension of service. I think you'd find that people who are serving without concern for bandwidth will all of a sudden monitor their own traffic a lot more.
This also takes the ISP out of the content monitor police service and relegates them to a bandwidth metering service, which is all they and everyone else wants them to do.
Re:Legality (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're interfering with other people's connections, then you are breaching contract. I'm not talking about bandwidth hogging, I'm talking about IP addresses.
Let me share a little experience I had with you. I had Kazaa running for a couple of weeks to get some eps of MST3k. When I turned it off, I discovered my IP address was being bombarded with hundreds and hundreds of kazaa users sending requests to the port Kazaa used. The number of these requests was so high that I could barely use the internet, and Quake was a joke.
If ATT&T had rotated addresses, somebody else would have inhereted my garbage. Imagine that for a sec: One day, your internet connection goes to crap, and AT&T has no clue as to why. Chances are pretty good that'll cause customers to blame AT&T's service without realizing the true cause of it.
In that case, it is possible that your use of Kazaa could severely interfere with other people's internet experience. The more Kazaa users there are out there, the more likely it is going to happen to somebody. The one who gets burned the most is the ISP.
I don't agree with what they're doing (personally I think they should send me a cable modem that has a built in firewall so I can stop the kazaa traffic myself), but I understand it.
Only the ISP's know what their real intentions are, but that's something else to consider when you use a prog like that. Now you know why I stopped using it.
Re:Legality (Score:2, Interesting)
You could try taping the next "yes" you get. RR might be forced to upgrade you to a business level plan
Re:So what? (Score:3, Interesting)
More To Come (Score:4, Interesting)
Collusion of ISPs - Remember the story last month where the leading companies in the Cable internet Biz got together? Think the only thing they talked about was capping bandwidths lower? Call it the OPEC of the internet. A handfull of companies control the fastest growing, and only viable, highspeed internet access. They can either backbight each other or agree to sell under terms where everyone gets a profitable piece of the pie
Market consolidation. look to see even more consolidation in the industry. Bandwidth providers combining with connection providers and maybe even content providers. The market is unhealthy with all the instability on Wallstreet many companies are ripe for takover or ready to deal.
My friends, the days of the "good deals" are over. Cable internet providers know they own the future of internet access and are making sure that future is profitible to the max. Look at it this way, what choice do you have?
Shared resource (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:"angry ex-customers" (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:More To Come (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, there's a reason why those laws exist, and yes, they have a history of "looking the other way", but the abundance of broadband is probably going to change the industry (not as much as HTML / HTTP), but when Joe Six Pack has broadband, it will probably prompt a major re-growth in the industry.
The funny thing is, not everyone has broadband right now...alot of
When did you see a site that actually put the "power of broadband" to good use.
I don't know of many. Oh, we see a few things like higher bitrate streaming video or always-on apps, P2P, etc... But in general, the industry is still opperating at 56k...
And then again, I'm sure the DSL providers can't wait for this...most places that have Broadband Cable either have or are getting DSL. The biggest reason most ppl have gone with cable is the speed, but that can change. Free markets necessitate lower costs and higher quality over a period of time. It's just the way it works. So, if RR pisses off the 5% of their users that most likely bring about more than half of their business, then they will be forced to change policy or drop the service.
I have RR broadband, and I'm not worried in the slightest. If they become too "difficult", I'll jst switch to DSL/Wireless/etc...And I'll take all of my friends and family with me...
Re:There is a clause in the TOS (Score:3, Interesting)
Even so, I think they'd have a hard time justifying that a certain P2P application always qualifies as "excessive use" no matter what. For example, if I were to hop on to KaZaA just long enough to download a single 5 MB file (such as an mp3), my bandwidth usage is going to be significantly less than if I download a single 51 MB file via HTTP (such as the latest update for Day of Defeat). So they're limiting users even in cases of non-excessive bandwidth usage, which wouldn't be protected by that TOS clause.
Re:"angry ex-customers" (Score:2, Interesting)
Dear Shaw High-Speed Internet Customer,
As a service to our customers, Shaw randomly monitors network traffic to
ensure high quality of service. Our reason for contacting you is we have
seen an unusual high level of activity on your Shaw High-Speed Internet
account. While you may, or may not be aware of this activity, it could be in
contradiction with Shaw's Acceptable Use Policy.
*****
Please Note: We are requesting an email or phone call confirming that you
understand the contents of this email, and will be acting upon the
information detailed below.
*****
Recently your account has exceeded what we would normally associate with one
of our residential packages. Typically, high amounts of Internet traffic
are caused by file sharing programs such as Morpheus, Kazaa, Imesh, Audio
Galaxy and Gnutella applications (to name just a few). Other likely sources
of high traffic are unmonitored streaming audio and video feeds, as well as
file or web servers. Even exchanging large multimedia files (songs, movies,
large graphic files) over chat programs (like ICQ) may lead to high traffic
over time.
We would be happy to discuss how the usage relates to the Acceptable Use
Policy. However, we do need to work with the account holder.
To view the Acceptable Use Policy please visit:
https://secure.shaw.ca/policy/Use-Policy.
To find your local Shaw phone number please visit:
http://support/contacts.htm
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:There is a clause in the TOS (Score:3, Interesting)
No, I imagine it'd be more like "you're hosting MP3s for an indie music label that competes with us. Since we control all high-speed access in your region, we control your ability to do this. We have therefor capped your account to 2400 baud. Please enjoy your AOL-TW "Unlimited" service package."
Re:"angry ex-customers" (Score:3, Interesting)
$500 per megabit? I don't think so. It only costs about $500/mo these days to get a T1 line with many gigabytes of upload quota per month. You sir, are full of shit.
Now if you mean Mbps, you are still full of shit, because it's cheaper than that if you just buy a single T1, and everyone knows that buying anything in bulk gets you a discount. Maybe not a large one, but you are still overstating the case.
Finally, name me an ISP that actually lets customers have a megabit of upstream these days, outside of a colo or similar. Typically speaking the upstream rate is limited to 128kbps or 384kbps on almost all services, including cable modems. For instance, DOCSIS cable modems can do (theoretically) 11mbps upstream and 45mbps downstream, but most providers (including mediacom, my current provider) limit you to 1.5mbps downstream and 128kbps upstream.
The fact that you can limit bandwidth means that you should not ever pay metered charges. Just limit me to the amount of bandwidth you think I should use, and go away. Offer lower bandwidth limits for less money, and vice versa. This is the only acceptable way to manage a system which started out as flat rate; going from flat to metered is unethical as it is a bait-and-switch method. In some cases, it is actually illegal to substitute something blatantly different from the original product.
I think your price estimate is ridiculous, and you haven't actually said anything with "megabit". I know ISPs don't pay $500 for a megabit of upstream traffic. Do you mean gigabit? I find even that hard to believe, but it's closer to being within the realm of possibility. Or if you're talking about overall capacity (Mbps) then you're still on crack, but it would make more sense that way.