Broadband: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST
Fuzzy...
by DarkPhalanx - 4/30/05 11:39 AM In reply to: Nothing Fuzzy About It. by benoddoI find it strange that you're defending the actions of a person that committed a crime. Personally, I don't subscribe to protecting a person's privacy if they've committed a crime, no matter how serious the offense was. It seems that people like to be able to do underhanded things and expect there to be no reprecussions due to the fact that their "privacy" cannot be invaded. Here's a hint folks. Ever since the Patriot Act was introduced, you can kiss the "old definition" of privacy goodbye. Too many people have had the good fortune to hide behind a very weak legal system when it's come to going after them if they break the law. Well, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime. If she or her kids hadn't done something illegal in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue.
comcast
by goodguy222 - 4/29/05 3:50 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoThanks ......I changed my isp today....bye bye Comcast
Comcast doesn't care.
by dzabor - 4/30/05 7:04 AM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoTalking about Comcast, yesterday a man from Comcast
Knocked on my door and informed me that he was here
to disconnect the Comcast cable from my house - he
said they made a mistake and forgot to disconnect it.
We never had Comcast and the former owners of the home had a satellite installation. What Comcast was really doing was getting around the “no solicitation” law in our town to try and sell their service. They are
sneaky, really sneaky.
comcast has many problems
by blueyes123 - 4/30/05 9:37 AM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoI run all the spam I get through spamcop (which doesn't seem to help) and most of them are through comcast as the isp. Most of these are also over 100kb, some over 250kb. Wonder why comcast doesn't go after these folks when they are advised of their illegal activity? Use this company only if you support their contemptuous behavior!
the origins of file sharing
by KX36 - 4/30/05 12:45 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoI know a lot of this discussion has been about who to blame in this case. But i have to blame one more party.
Whoever is is that says a CD single should cost £10 ($15) and an album £15($25).
Back in the good old days of LPs and 45s that was fair enough. If you look at the alice cooper - school's out LP, you got a hefty piece of vinyl, a good cardboard sleeve, unique to all the other LPs, with stands, an opening desk, a puzzle on the inside, loads of details, pictures, even a pair of ornamental panties. that's a fair amount for the equivalent cost nowadays.
but now, you get a thin piece of plastic that costs 10p to make in a snother piece of plasic with a small single sheet cover, and yet they charge jsut as much as they always have just because "that's how mcuh an album has always cost"
I refuse to pay over $20 for a cheap CD of 45 mins music. and until the records are fairly priced, I will continue to get them for free or cheaps from the internet. I pay for broadband, which is to me just access to download music, why shoudln't I.
You are too kind...
by jasonioni - 4/30/05 1:13 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoThe things I would like to say about comcast are not appropriate for a public forum, however I can say that it is evil incarnate. They like to do things like offer free channels for six months, then start billing you the full price for that channel as soon as the six months are up. It is up to you to a)remember & b) call them and cancel the channel. Even then, your first call may not always take, "No, I show you as still subscribing to that channel" The bill for tv and internet had one total and went to the same address, yet if you want have a question about the other, have to call a whole different number, and neither one can speak to you about the whole bill. The last and indeed first straw was that I was supposed to get a rebate for ordering the modem online, I got the (smaller) one from Motorola, but as to the other one (more than $50) all I got was a cryptic one sentance email to the effect of "Sorry"
Thank you all for allowing me to rant.
Comcast must go,
Jason
Privacy: an excuse to steal
by riccoh - 5/1/05 9:28 AM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoIt seems that privacy & unlawful behavior go hand in hand.
Comcast has no obligation to shield it's users prohibited actions, any more than domestic privacy shields you from drug use or wife beating. I see a real disregard for law in general in this country. Try to do the speed limit in the carpool lane and see what happens. While seemingly unrelated, these attitudes are indicative of our willingness to ignore the rules when it's convenient.
I hope the recording industry throws the book at these thieves. Kudos to Comcast for being a good corporate citizen.
It's about protecting our basic rights.
by Vanz76 - 5/2/05 7:16 AM In reply to: Privacy: an excuse to steal by riccohYou seem to be confused about the balance between breaking the law and protecting our civil rights. Laws are important and should be lawfully enforced. I don't believe that all laws are right and good for society (prohibition was a disaster but it was the law). Sometimes in the pursuit of proper legal enforcement criminals go free (OJ Simpson). However overall we enjoy the best legal system in the world. Why? Because as a country we also protect our civil rights. One of those is the right to privacy. As was mentioned in an earlier forum response the police must have a warrant issued by a judge in order to invade a person's privacy. Comcast was not under any legal mandate to violate their customer's privacy. I belive that our right to privacy supercedes Comcast's potential right to expose a potential lawbreaker in this case. Privacy is a tricky issue, it is shades of grey. If Comcast exposed a terrrorist plot, I would be in full support of sharing this information with authorities. However in this case no one was saved and it is questionable if our society is stronger as a result. In the end, Comcast made a business decision not a legal one.
Double Standards....
by DarkPhalanx - 5/6/05 6:45 AM In reply to: It's about protecting our basic rights. by Vanz76Thanks for exposing your Golden double standards, but real life doesn't work that way. Since when is it okay to have your privacy protected in order to commit a crime? It seems that some people will go to any length to argue the right to privacy, and yet on the other hand, condone an obvious illegal act, and top it off with the common phrase "Civil Rights". Here's a news flash, there are laws to obey. If you break them, there is a price to pay. Don't attempt to hide behind "Civil Rights" as a defense to breaking the law. The problem with the legal system today as we know it, is that it leans towards the softer side of enforcing the law, instead of being harsh. Throw the book at the criminals, and make examples out of them.
I really hate using this example, but...
by mechanismatic - 5/13/05 10:52 AM In reply to: Double Standards.... by DarkPhalanxI really hate to use this example, because it is overused, and often without warrant, but it seems necessary to articulate here. In Nazi Germany, it was perfectly legal to assault Jewish people. Hence, laws are not always right! If Jews had a right to privacy in that fascist government, they would be able to conceal their heritage and then perhaps escape unjust abuse and even death. People are not always guilty of the crimes of which they are accused. The system gets it wrong sometimes. The statement that 'if they are innocent, then they have nothing to worry about' holds no water. People who are innocent have been wrongly prosecuted. If privacy prevents people from even being charged with crimes they did not commit, then the system works. If that means that some criminals also are not charged with crimes they have in fact committed, it is necessary. If we were absolutely honest about the crimes we have committed, we would all be in the least paying hefty fines for the rest of our lives, much less some of us would be in prison. How many times have you ever exceeded the speed limit in your life? Are you willing to have the book thrown at you for those offenses? Do you want to have to pay at least a $50 fine for each offense, not to mention court processing fees? How much money would you be in debt if you were held accountable for everything you've ever done wrong? Or are you perfect? The system works when not everyone is held accountable for their wrongs. Especially not every wrong we've ever committed. You do not know for a fact that the woman involved in this case did actually commit the crime for which you think she should have the proverbial book thrown at her. Blind condemnations from ignorant third parties have no part in the American justice system, and it works this way whether you think it should or not.
Comcast the snitch
by cedrowilli - 5/1/05 9:28 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoYou pay for Comcast to provide Internet service. If the RIAA wants a watchdog for lawbreakers, let them pay for them. Further, the law is a bad law. Music is splattered all over the Internet, some of it free for the taking, and you're going to tie up the courts with that? Nobody's music is worth that much as an art. If it's only about money, then I say finding free music on the Internet is like finding free money on the street. Comcast ought to be buried for their overbearing act. They are so big, it isn't even dangerous for them to turn in their own customers...and without even a warning yet!
It rightfully does beg the question, what other private info are they blabbing about, legal or not, that could do somebody harm. Folks that may not be breaking this law need to get off their high horse and consider the possiblity that they are being scrutinized unfairly or may be in the future, even without breaking the law. Trust is a two-way street. Comcast is no better than the woman who allegedly broke the copyright law; laws, which I believe have run amok.
Cedro
need to take back control
by asus - 5/1/05 9:59 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoif you pay for a service you exspect to get what you pay for not to pay to have someone to invade your privacy .as it goes now our rights are being takin away more every day,serive providers make us sign contracts why is that were paying them to do work for us we should have them sign saying they will do only what there payed to do and list all that is exspected from them, that would be like the lawn care guy walking in your house and lookin in your file cabinet would you like that? he is payed to cut grass not dig in your files thats the same difference she payed concast to get her online not watch her every move online , so if they know that she downloaded music and told the riaa if she does her banking online who they give that info to?
Comcast Was Wrong - Boycott Them!
by Vanz76 - 5/2/05 5:52 AM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddoWhen Comcast voluntarily handed over the woman's information (and presumably many others who have chosen not to sue) they betrayed any sense of trust between the company and their customers. I agree if Comcast faced a court order to hand over names, they would be legally required to respond. However, by voluntarily scouring their files for suspicious behaviors they showed they care about one thing. They care more about the copyright issue than their customers. They volunteered the information. They used corporate resources, time and money, to find them. They proactively offered up names. I am not a Comcast customer (they are my local area cable provider). I will never be a Comcast customer. If any company I pay for services follows Comcast’s lead, I will discontinue paying for their services as well. You have a choice. Simply, I choose to boycott Comcast.
ISP's have your number...
by DarkPhalanx - 5/6/05 7:00 AM In reply to: Comcast Was Wrong - Boycott Them! by Vanz76It doesn't matter WHO your ISP provider is. Don't think for a minute, that you're protected from the law if you commit an illegal act. Sooner or later they'll nail you, and you can crya all you want about boycotting, or the Constitution and your Civil Rights. The bottom line is that if you commit a crime, be prepared to suck it up, and accept responsibilty for what you have done, instead of trying to shift blame on something, or someone else.
Did you forget about due process?
by benoddo - 5/8/05 11:28 AM In reply to: ISP's have your number... by DarkPhalanxWhatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Whatever happened to due process of the law? No matter what you do, a prosecutor must obtain evidence against you legally. How would you like it if the phone company sent transcripts of your telephone conversations with your girlfriend.... to your wife's attorney?
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
