CUT-THE-CABLE.COM

May 12, 2010

Help Save the Internet from Comcast

The gauntlet has been thrown down and a show down is brewing. On April 6th, A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously tossed out the FCC’s August 2008 cease and desist order against Comcast, which had taken measures to stop their  ‘management’ of BitTorrent transfers. Because the FCC [...]

The gauntlet has been thrown down and a show down is brewing. On April 6th, A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously tossed out the FCC’s August 2008 cease and desist order against Comcast, which had taken measures to stop their  ‘management’ of BitTorrent transfers.

Because the FCC “has failed to tie its assertion” of regulatory authority to an actual law enacted by Congress, the agency does not have the power to regulate an Internet provider’s network management practices, wrote Judge David Tatel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. [But Your Honor, isn't the whole concept of Network Management as it pertains to the Internet contrary to the fundamental tenets of Net Neutrality?]

So, what is this “Net Neutrality” that everyone is making such a fuss about?  Here’s a quick and dirty video to give you the run down.

So that sounds simple enough, right?  Well here’s the rest of the story…

The April 6th decision could doom the whole initiative to empower the FCC along these lines.  Comcast (and other ISPs for that matter) can now BLOCK ANY AND ALL WEB SITES without any fear of repercussions and could eliminate the agency’s ability to write new open- Internet rules.

Fortunately this is not the end.  The FCC may appeal the case, and may seriously consider placing Internet services into a stricter regulatory classification by moving Internet service under telephone rules which could happen with a simple simple majority vote within the agency. [To some this might seem like a step backward, but from a political standpoint, it may be a necessary evil to get the job done]

The large ISPs claim that such a reclassification of Internet service would have far-reaching and destructive consequences including years of investment-deterring uncertainty and litigation.  [Whatever!  The bottom line is that if we want The Internet to continue to be The Internet, then someone need to keep these big boys on a leash]

So what can you do you ask?  Go to “Save The Internet” which is sponsored by Free Press and sign the petition.  Let the FCC know that you are on their side.  Tell them that you want the regulations needed to insure that the Internet will not be turned into something else altogetherTell them you want regulated pricing for Internet services.  Let them know that we believe in the free market, but the large ISPs refuse to compete on price which creates an artificially inflated cost to the consumers.

Click here >>>> “Save The Internet”

[...and Thank You for your support]

June 12, 2009

Class Action Lawsuit Against Comcast on the Horizon

Read all about it at CEDMagazine.com Another suit has been filed against Comcast over required set-top box leases.  Alabama resident Gloria Cordier and her attourney Stephen Mullins filed in Mobile’s federal court claiming that Comcast is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act by forcing customers to pay a monthly rental fee for a set-top box in order [...]

Read all about it at CEDMagazine.com

Another suit has been filed against Comcast over required set-top box leases.  Alabama resident Gloria Cordier and her attourney Stephen Mullins filed in Mobile’s federal court claiming that Comcast is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act by forcing customers to pay a monthly rental fee for a set-top box in order to watch premium channels.

This is the seconds suit of this type in less than one month.  The other was initiated by Gordon Ramey of West Virginia.  The individual filings could likely be consolidated into a single class action suit.

We salute Gordon, Gloria, and all of the brave man and women that choose to take action rather than passively allow Comcast to pick their pockets on a daily basis.  If these do turn into a class action, there will be an opportunity for lots more to join in on the fun. 

THE LAWYERS WILL WANT TO SETTLE to get a fat check while the members of the class each end up with a check for something like $2.17…NOTHING DOING!!!  We want COMCAST out of the Cable Box rental business, and preferably out of business all together.

May 19, 2009

Comcast Slapped with Anti-Trust Class Action Suit

Read the news at HuntingtonNews.net Gordon Ramey II has filed a federal anti-trust complaint against Comcast due to mandatory rental fees for “cable box” or “set-top-boxes,” which are mandatory to view premium and/or digital cable.  The suit alleges that the company’s actions constitute an unlawful tying arrangement resulting in an impermissible restraint of trade. Due [...]

Read the news at HuntingtonNews.net

Gordon Ramey II has filed a federal anti-trust complaint against Comcast due to mandatory rental fees for “cable box” or “set-top-boxes,” which are mandatory to view premium and/or digital cable.  The suit alleges that the company’s actions constitute an unlawful tying arrangement resulting in an impermissible restraint of trade.

Due to a monopoly in cable markets and its dominance in the industry, the company’s “sufficiently strong economic power” , cable box competitors have “little motivation” or are “foreclosed” from entering the market, since Comcast which has more than 50% of the cable market.

Ramey’s attorneys allege that the cable provider purchases the boxes from Motorola or Scientific Atlanta “at a fixed and low cost… only to turn around and rent the same boxes to the class (for a hefty profit) with full knowledge that members of the Class have no choice but to pay the rental fees.”

A Comcast spokeman wants to say “Bring it on!  We’ll tie this up in the courts for 20-years and out-spend you into the ground.  By that time, set-top boxes will be gone and customers will be forced to buy Comcast-branded TV sets”

May 11, 2009

Comcast settles with Boston for $1 Million

Filed under: In the News — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — admin @ 8:38 am
According to The Boston Herald on May 6th, 164,000 Comcast subscribers will each get a $6.08 credit as part of a $1 million settlement agreement that the cable company brokered with the city of Boston. The city charged that Comcast “erroneously” passed on to customers expenses it incurred for installing fiber optic cables. Comcast agreed [...]

According to The Boston Herald on May 6th, 164,000 Comcast subscribers will each get a $6.08 credit as part of a $1 million settlement agreement that the cable company brokered with the city of Boston.

The city charged that Comcast “erroneously” passed on to customers expenses it incurred for installing fiber optic cables. Comcast agreed to reimburse subscribers for the charges but did not admit any fault.

A Comcast spokeperson wishes that they said “Of couse we’re not at fault, and here’s a million dollars to prove it.  What’s the matter?  We didn’t pay you politicians enough to look the other way?  Now take the money and PISS OFF”.

March 31, 2009

Comcast sues OceanNet for Reselling Internet Service

Read the whole story at ARSTechnica Frank Clark has dared to compete with Comcast and now they intend to punished him. Forget the fact that OceanNet has violated the Terms of Service of the Comcast Residential Internet Service Agreement which prohibit reselling their services. We look forward to having those Terms of Service challenged in [...]

Read the whole story at ARSTechnica

Frank Clark has dared to compete with Comcast and now they intend to punished him. Forget the fact that OceanNet has violated the Terms of Service of the Comcast Residential Internet Service Agreement which prohibit reselling their services. We look forward to having those Terms of Service challenged in a court of law. The real issue here is that OceanNet was offering the consumer a better VALUE than Comcast, and that dips into Comcast’s profits so they intend to send “a message” to other would-be competitors (…at least the ones they’re not already in bed with). GOOD LUCK Frank!

Powered by WordPress