Vuze petitions FCC to restrict Internet traffic throttling by ISPs
by Daniel LangendorfNovember 15th, 2007 | Posted in Net TV, Other |
3 Comments
Vuze, an application that allows users to search, browse, and download “DVD and HD-quality” video content using the peer-to-peer protocol BitTorrent, has petitioned the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to restrict Internet traffic throttling by Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
Vuze’s timing is important. John Hart filed suit in a California state court Tuesday against Comcast, which offers ISP services. The suit alleges that Comcast’s secret use of technology to limit peer-to-peer applications such as BitTorrent violates federal computer fraud laws, the contracts users have with Comcast, and anti-fraudulent advertising statutes. Hart wants the court to force Comcast to stop interfering with Internet traffic. (Wired report.)
Since it uses the peer-to-peer protocol BitTorrent, Vuze has been keenly aware of Comcast and the “bandwidth shaping” issue. Vuze filed its “Petition for Rulemaking” (PDF) to urge the FCC to adopt regulations limiting Internet traffic throttling, a practice by which ISPs block or slow the speed at which Internet content, including video files, can be uploaded or downloaded.
“Now is the time to embrace the sea changes in entertainment consumption that are occurring,” said Vuze CEO Gilles BianRosa in a release. “The rapid convergence of the entertainment and Internet industries has enabled the delivery of high-quality video, and these throttling tactics represent growing pains as ISPs resist inevitable change.
“We hope our petition will trigger a pubic discussion, but we also need the FCC to act. The industry needs transparency into what ISPs are doing and an environment that fosters innovation in online entertainment.”
last100 editor Steve O’Hear has covered Vuze and the ISP issue extensively in several reports. (Vuze.) (ISPs.)
At issue is whether “throttling” should be allowed. “Throttling” is often characterized by ISPs as “network management” or “traffic shaping”, which Vuze and others contend interferes with the consumer Internet experience.
If these tactics continue unchecked, Vuze contends, the openness and fairness of the public Internet could be called into question.
In an email to last100, Vuze explained that one of the petition’s aims is to get ISPs, P2P providers, content creators and consumers to contribute to a discussion on the issue and help develop future solutions.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to the RSS feed!
Other posts that may be of interest
- Vuze - an indie-friendly video distribution platform
- Will ISPs spoil the online video party?
- Weekly wrapup, 11 - 16 November 2007
- Vuze opens up platform; claims 10 million “viewers”
- YouTube represents 10% of North American Internet traffic
- Weekly wrapup, 25 - 29 June 2007
I offer completely legal BitTorrent downloads of my Creative Commons piano compositions at http://www.geometricvisions.com/music/ These aren’t pirated MP3s, as they are provided with the permission of the copyright holder - me.
BitTorrent is crucial to me as it keeps down my web hosting bill; with the FLAC download of my album being over a hundred megabytes, were I to only offer HTTP downloads I could easily be bankrupted by bandwidth bills. ISPs like Comcast threaten my livelihood, and my aspirations as a musician.
My previous ISP blocked BitTorrent, so I was unable to monitor that my own torrents were working!
When I moved into my new house, I found that the cable TV service was provided by Comcast. I’m too far from the central telephone office for conventional DSL, so I pay extra for a slower service called IDSL (DSL over ISDN) that can go farther. But at least my new ISP, Stephouse, has a great Acceptable Use Policy and does not interfere with my torrents.
So when do we now require internet users to share their bandwidth (most unknowningly) to distribute others content? Why should part of my internet usage go to making someone else money without me being compensated? If people want their content distributed then let them pay for the bandwidth and quit leaching off others bandwidth for free.
So when do we now require internet users to share their bandwidth (most unknowningly) to distribute others content? Why should part of my internet usage go to making someone else money without me being compensated? If people want their content distributed then let them pay for the bandwidth and quit leaching off others bandwidth for free.
Perhaps you shouldn’t run bittorrent then? You after all made that decision knowing how bittorrent works. You benefited from it as much as the next guy. And now you complain about compensation?
Perhaps you should come up with something that meets your criteria and get back with us. I’ve love to hear how you intend to implement your solution.