ISPs Banning P2P On Wireless For 3+ YearsAdded: Thursday, August 19th, 2010
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
Although the recent news were dominating with Google and Verizon’s Net Neutrality proposal and critics arguing it could kill Net Neutrality on wireless networks, nobody paid any attention to the fact that P2P traffic have been banned by ISPs for years.
Within the last week, Google has been criticized by a number of self-respecting online news outlets after the service has published a proposal targeting at preserving Net Neutrality. The critics pointed at the suggestion offering to limit the rules to only wired networks. Well, despite the fact that this proposal isn’t ideal at all, the misplaced outrage towards Google is even more surprising. The question is how can critics claim this deal could kill Net Neutrality if there is no neutrality in the first place?
The story of Comcast preventing P2P users from uploading is about three years old, but within all this time nobody paid attention to such wireless Internet providers as AT&T and Verizon that have been banning P2P traffic as well. The companies complain that a single P2P user could ruin the entire wireless tower, as there are too many random packets wondering in the air.
Even before the disclosure of Comcast’s blocking practices Verizon was reported to not allow any P2P traffic on its wireless networks. The years passed, but the ISP has just slightly changed its Terms of Service, still not welcoming BitTorrent users. The remarkable fact is that Verizon is not the only ISP with such policy: AT&T’s Terms of Service includes the similar section, prohibiting specific uses causing interference with the network, for example automatic data feeds, Web camera broadcasts or posts, or peer-to-peer file sharing. Neutral as it is.
As we can see, nobody cared of Net Neutrality being imposed on wireless networks, but once Google and Verizon announced their plans it caused a whole bunch of protests, though their proposal is quite similar to the Net Neutrality regulations proposed by the FCC a couple of months ago. Even EFF acknowledged it as a great step.
So, it’s not quite clear where all this hatred towards Verizon comes from – the companies’ proposal can’t destroy Net Neutrality anyway, just because it doesn’t exist yet. Still, it’s an improvement on wired networks.
In fact, the Internet would be better off with the Google and Verizon’s proposal implemented than without it. Though wireless networks should be neutral at the end.
August 19th, 2010Posted by:
Thursday, August 19th, 2010
|Surgeon General's Warning: Blocking P2P traffic could harm your ISP. Thanks SaM.|
|i can promise you, Clear(Clearwire) its self, didnt. They treat all P2P traffic the same... like crap. i work for them, i should know this. That stated, i dont agree with Google/Verizon agreement, but it would ruin the footholds of Net Neutrality as it is.|
Btw, T.o.S Agreement for Clear, States no Activity classified as Client to Client Transfers is Prohibited. Across there network. But it also states that they employ 'user-usage' tactics to 'alter data plans during ongoing large transfers. over monthly expectations of 1.5gb" so how big were those media files Mena?
|posted by (2010-08-20 14:37:37)|
|@ menahunie - I think u should start your own blogging as the way u write in comments & if any quest. PM me !|
@ Sam - Good knowledge article to read !
|posted by (2010-08-22 13:25:28)|
|THANKS FOR SHARE||
Most Popular Stories