Media Post, April 16, 2008
By Wendy Davis

As the Federal Communications Commission gears up for a public hearing about Net Neutrality tomorrow, Comcast is trying to recast itself as a leader in managing peer-to-peer traffic.

Comcast said it’s going to shepherd an effort to create a “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities,” which will outline how consumers and Internet service providers can best use or manage peer-to-peer applications. The news comes shortly after Comcast said it was going to work with BitTorrent to stop throttling traffic and instead develop a “platform agnostic” strategy to manage its network.

But for net neutrality advocates, Comcast’s efforts now are far too little, too late.

Public Knowledge, a leading proponent of net neutrality, called Comcast’s latest announcement “ludicrous.” Gigi Sohn, president and co-founder of the group, said in a statement that the proposal “is simply another way for Comcast to try to evade punishment for its blocking and degrading of peer-to-peer services for its customers.”

Free Press also took aim at Comcast. “Consumers cannot trust Comcast or any other phone and cable company with the future of the Internet,” Marvin Ammori, general counsel of Free Press, said in a statement. “Comcast’s announcement is little more than the fox telling the farmer, ‘I’ll guard the henhouse, you can go home.’ ”

Comcast’s history over the last year certainly gives critics grounds for pause. Some customers noticed at least as early as last summer that their attempts to visit peer-to-peer sites weren’t always successful. Eventually, The Associated Press investigated and found that Comcast was indeed impeding traffic to peer-to-peer sites.

Comcast, while denying that it blocked any visits, finally admitted that it slowed some traffic as a means of managing its network. Advocates filed complaints with the FCC and, in February, the agency held its first public hearing on net neutrality — at which Comcast packed the audience with seat-warmers.

Given Comcast’s track record, it’s clear why net neutrality advocates are continuing to urge the FCC to unequivocally state that Internet service providers shouldn’t decide on their own to interfere with customers’ ability to reach certain sites.

This article is copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.