+ 0 Votes I still don't understand how cable ISPs can get away with it... jck 4 years ago If an ISP says in a service agreement that I have 10Mb down and 2.5Mb up speeds on the internet.Then, they restrict my right to use an application protocol that they deem improper (not law).How is it fair business?How is that network management? It does nothing to alter or reconfigure the network at all. It only filters content.Just a hoser move. Another thing to let big business not have to compete in a free market system. + 0 Votes This is a great ruling RFink 4 years ago I don't agree with Comcast. I agree with the court. Since Congress didn't give the FCC the authority then too bad, so sad. It looks like the FCC has to convince Congress that it needs the authority. Think of the sad shape this country would be in if all federal agencies could do whatever they wanted because they felt like it. + 0 Votes It's lousy for the internet NickNielsen Moderator 4 years ago But it's good law. If the FCC doesn't have the authority, they shouldn't be allowed to do it. The same applies with any other executive agency, no matter the level of government. + 0 Votes Need for new regulating body mjd420nova 4 years ago Sounds like what we need is a new agency to oversee the internet and specifically those providers that provide content over propietery methods, either cable or phone lines. These entities do not "transmit" over the air waves and are not subject to anything laid down under the Communications Act of 1934, where the FCC gets its power from. What those providers do over their own lines is their own business, how they edit or control the content, speeds and protocols is entirely up to them and until some agency is commisioned to take charge of these providers we will be stuck with the way they want to do things is we use them as our gateway to the internet. We are at their mercy and they know it and will continue to do as they see fit. It's a sad state of affairs. + 0 Votes A double edged sword butkus 4 years ago The only Bit-Torrent use is downloading movies, MP3's and illegal software copies. Unless someone comes up with "real" uses, 95% of it is illegal stuff that clogs up bandwidth. Just check out TorrentFreak.com, it's just hi-tech theft. If the end user has a problem with that provider's speed, they can go with satellite, DSL or fiber. I'd rather my HD image not freeze then some kids on my cable line need 250+ movies on their HD.I've just started NetFlick downloads. It's great, just get a good Sony BR system and a USB stick. They want to mess with something legal, then that's the other edge of the sword. I just figured out how to get my 25Mb Comcast connection to work right. With every cable channel moving to HD, you'll need the bandwidth. Besides, according to Comcast's statement, these complainers are a tiny fraction of all users, but use 50% of the bandwidth (some where around there). + 0 Votes This says it all ! butkus 4 years ago From a "bit-torrent" siteThis is what you are defending. This says it all:"i can see he movie idk y cause when i download the movie a could and now i cant"And the person may have texted this while driving to his H.S.Is this really what needs to be defended ? + 0 Votes This was the Court of Appeals, not the DoJ rucb_alum 4 years ago The Dept of Justice is an executive branch. The Court of Appeals is part of the judiciary.Comcast may have built an on ramp to but does not own 'the Internet'. If they want to throttle users, they should set up their own proprietary network. It ain't that hard. Comcast should lose their artificial monopolies if they keep it up.Congress needs to expand FCC authority to Internet access but NOT content.