Different Rates for Different Customers
- AT&T Accunet packet switching service was forced to withdraw from service in 1985 when the FCC found that it improperly favored AT&T Information Service over all other customers.
AUPs
- Note that AUPs generally
prohibit more activity than merely what is illegal. You may see
an AUP say that "inappropriate content" or harassment is prohibited.
- RCN FAQ
- Comcast TOS
- § 6(c) Service may only be used by members of the household living at your address (this would exclude a friend or guest).
- § 6(g) Subscribers acknowledge that Comcast can monitor all of subscribers transmissions
"Unlimited"
- 3G / EVDO Wireless Internet providers have marketed their services as "unlimited." However, it is reported that wireless 3G / EVDO providers have terminated contracts of customers who have used too much broadbhand.
- A new discussion is forming over the ability to apply Carterphone to wireless devices; in other words, the ability to attach any device (hard or soft) at the end of the telecommunications line as authorized pursuant to Carterphone and Part 68.
Virtual
Private Networks VPN See Crypto
- One cable
company to rule them all Salon 2004 ("Comcast has already demonstrated a
willingness to circumscribe what customers do online. It has not only
attacked high-use customers but, in the past, has also curbed virtual
private networks (a popular way for corporations to integrate
telecommuters into the company intranet) and, according to some
customers, has limited traffic on Usenet, the oldest (and most
unregulated) of all the Net's discussion forums. The company's terms of
service also prohibit users from running file-sharing
applications (among other things), and it has a less-than-clear
policy on whether running a Wi-Fi network in your house is OK.")
- Comcast
to FCC: Virtual Private Nets are OK. (Policy). Looksmark March 2003
- Cable
Firms Faulted For Restrictions On Internet Service Washington Post
June 2002 ("In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission, the
companies say that in the subscriber agreements of major cable Internet
providers, there are prohibitions on the use of private corporate
networks that allow employees to work from home; restrictions on adding
hardware such as servers and game boxes to the networks; and clauses
that reserve the right to restrict access to certain
bandwidth-intensive sites, such as those for online gambling.")
- Cable Net
Users Feel Squeezed, Wired Aug 2000
- Customers
blast Comcast move to foil bandwidth hogs CNET Aug 2000
Methods of Blocking / Interference
Packet Inspection
To treat some data packets differently than others, as opposed to simply using a
first-in-first-out and best-efforts approach, a network operator must be able to identify
certain relevant characteristics of those packets. One source of identifying information
is the packet's header, which contains the IP address of its source and destination. The
packet header also contains several types of information that suggest the type of
application required to open the data file, such as the source and destination port
numbers, the transport protocol, the differentiated service code point or traffic class, and
the packet's length. Additionally, the header contains the Media Access Control
("MAC") address of the packet's source and destination, which provides information
about the manufacturer of the device attached to the network.108
In recent years, router manufacturers have refined packet-inspection technologies
to provide network operators with a wide range of information about the data traffic on
their networks, including information not provided in packet headers. These
technologies were developed in part to help local area networks direct traffic more
efficiently and to thwart security risks. Deep packet inspection may also be
implemented on the Internet to examine the content of packet streams - even search for
keywords in text - and to take action based on content- or application-specific policies.
Such actions could involve tracking, filtering, or blocking certain types of packet streams.
Further, deep packet inspection can map the information it accumulates to databases
containing, for instance, demographic or billing information.
Another relatively new technology that may be implemented to reveal information
about packet streams is flow classification. This technology monitors the size of packets
in a data stream, the time elapsed between consecutive packets, and the time elapsed
since the stream began, with the goal of making reasonable determinations about the
nature of the packets in the stream. Thus, flow classification may reveal information
about a packet stream even if the individual packets themselves are encrypted against
packet inspection. With the development of these two technologies, it is now costeffective
for a network operator to gain extensive knowledge about the nature of the data
traveling across its network. [FTC Staff Report 2007 p 30]
Traffic Management / Shaping
- Papers
- See Marsden Sec. 1.2.2 Types of Content Discrimination: Blocking and Traffic Shaping
- News
For a period in the 1990s, Network Solutions, the sole domain name registrar for dot com operating pursuant to US government contract, adopted a policy that certain words could not be registered as domain names. See DNS History. This resulted in some weird results where shit.com had been registered but shitakemushroom.com could not be registered. Network Solutions also sought to implement a policy that would prevent the registration of domain names that might bother trademark owners.
VoIP (Madison River
et al)
SPAM
SPAM is a signficant problem. Left unchecked, the email signal-to-noise ratio becomes so bad that a
service can be rendered unuseable. Most email services now are
aggressively engaged in anti spam
strategies for filtering out SPAM.
- How
Comcast censors political content, Free Press 7/19/2005
- RCN FAQ Prohibited "You agree not to post or transmit any unsolicited
advertising, promotional materials, or other forms of solicitation to
other subscribers, individuals, or entities, except in those areas
(e.g., classified advertisement areas) that are designated for such a
purpose"
Some networks, for
example EVDO networks,
reportedly ban streaming media over their networks.
Prioritization
Recently, some network operators have suggested that they would like to use
these new technologies to prioritize certain data traffic or to provide other types of
quality-of-service assurances to content and applications providers and/or end users in
exchange for a premium fee.115 In contrast to the practice of transmitting data on a firstin-
first-out and best-efforts basis, network operators could use a router algorithm to favor
the transmission of certain packets based on characteristics such as their source,
destination, application type, or related network attachment. One or more of these
strategies could be employed to manage network traffic generally. Or, they might be
used by a network operator to actively degrade certain non-favored traffic.
Packets going to or from certain favored addresses could be given priority
transmission. Likewise, network operators could give priority to packets for latencysensitive
applications such as VoIP or network video games. In the alternative, routers
could be programmed to reroute, delay, or drop certain packets.116 For example, a
network operator could block packets considered to be a security threat.117 It could drop
or otherwise delay packets associated with unaffiliated or otherwise disfavored users,
content, or applications.118 A network could apply such treatment only in certain circumstances, such as during periods of congestion, after a quota of packets has been
met, or, until certain usage fees are paid.119 Some observers, however, question whether
implementing wide-scale prioritization or similar schemes across multiple networks
having differing technical characteristics is, in fact, even technically possible.120
Network operators also could provide separate physical or logical channels for
different classes of traffic.121 Another method for favoring certain Internet traffic is to
reserve capacity on last-mile bandwidth for certain packet streams to provide a minimum
level of quality.122 Similarly, a network operator could limit the amount of bandwidth
available to an end user, thereby degrading or effectively blocking altogether the use of bandwidth-intensive content or applications.123 A network operator also could treat data
packets differently by providing preferential access to services, such as local caching.124
Data also can be treated differently through the use of pricing structures, such as
service tiers, to provide a certain quality-of-service level in exchange for payment.125 In
a fee-for-priority system, content and applications providers and/or end users paying
higher fees would receive quicker, more reliable data transmissions. Sometimes, such an
arrangement is referred to as a "fast lane." Other data might simply be provided on a
best-efforts basis. Similarly, a network operator might assess fees to end users based on
their behavior patterns, a practice sometimes referred to as "content billing" or "content
charging."126 [FTC Staff Report 2007 p 31-33]
Historically, the incumbent telephone companies
refused to allow third parties to attach equipment to their networks.
This equipment attached by the customer at home is known as Customer Premises Equipment. One fellow invented a
little plastic scoop called a Hush-a-Phone, which attached to the
handset of a phone, that would in effect make the conversation more
private. AT&T said this piece of plastic would harm the network and
in the 1940s sued. The DC Circuit Court rules that individuals AT&T
could not prohibit Hush-a-Phone attachments. Hush-a-Phone was a
non-electrical attachment to the network. In Carterfone, the FCC would
conclude that AT&T could not discriminate against and prohibt the
electrical attachments as well (this would come to be crucial for
modems). See CPE page for greater detail.
For a time, it appeared that the attachment of a WiFi
Access Point to a network would violate that network's AUP.
Attaching Servers
- Note: P2P applications turn computers into servers in order to host content. Those the use of P2P applications potentially would violate these provisions.
- Cable
Firms Faulted For Restrictions On Internet Service Washington Post
June 2002 ("In a filing with the Federal Communications Commission, the
companies say that in the subscriber agreements of major cable Internet
providers, there are prohibitions on the use of private corporate
networks that allow employees to work from home; restrictions on adding
hardware such as servers and game boxes to the networks; and clauses
that reserve the right to restrict access to certain
bandwidth-intensive sites, such as those for online gambling.")
- The
inside skinny on cable ZDNet ("Most cable agreements prohibit
running a Web server from your end of your high-speed line")
- Broadband;
New Media, Act on Vision
- COMCAST Terms of Service § 5(b) Prohibition against operating a server
Internet Filtering (for copyrighted material)
- AT&T has announced that it is exploring filtering of its network for infringing content (particularly P2P).
- Record labels complain that privacy is "devastating the industry." Filtering is *a* solution. Operations automatically and anonymously. Filters can be placed in applications, on end users computer. If you want to hear it, filter would prevent it even after it is decrypted. This could be put in the modem. Referenced User Generated Content Principles. In response to U2 Manager comments, indicates that we are looking for a market place solution over a legislative solution. This is a business problem for network service providers that hurts networks and users. [RIAA Cary Sherman Internet Caucus State of the Net 2008]
- Filtering limits free speach. Inpsecting every single packet to look for copyright; there is a privacy aspect to this. The recorfd companies need to make their content widely, flexibily and at a reasonable priace. There are a number of positive models like live.fm - different models that people are experimenting with. The possibility of paying ISPs a licensing fee so that users can download all they want. Education should include not only what is infringing but also rights under fair use. DMCA and CDA protections is premised on the OSP not messing with the traffic. A neutral pipe. Once an OSP starts deep packet inspection, starts acting as a publisher, then you lose your DMCA and CDA protections. Telephone companies want to have it both ways. We like DMCA immunity. But you cant both be and not be the dumb pipe. Bono Mack talked about 80% of net traffic is P2P; a lot of that P2P traffic is legitimate traffic. The use of copyright to block speach is a free speach issue with government action. The largely point - this is the way that people are communicating today. See new document Fair Use Principles for User Generated Content, PK [Gigi Sohn Net Caucus State of the Net 2008]
- Tech is very good at determining whether two pieces of content is identical; technology is very bad at determining whether content is infringing or fair use. Therefore connect human review with technology reviews. Have not seen a lot of user disputes yet but a lot of rights owners are partnering and monetizing, allowing their content to stay on the site. Issue of fair use getting block. [Mia Garlick, YouTube (Google)Net Caucus State Net 2008]
- Vast majority of music collections are built based on passing around and ripping CDs; therefore filtering would be ineffective. Cost: things that no one intends to block gets block. Ex/ use of bittorrent to distribute software by software company. Need human intervention to correct overbreadth of technology. RIAA DMCA complaints tend to be very accurate. Other agencies tend to be notoriously inaccurate or difficult. NBC complaints are very difficult to respond to. Costs $100-$200k to respond to this. But it is a reasonable balance. DMCA notices is reasonable. [Greg Jackson, University of Chicago, Net Caucus State of Net 2008]
- Verizon Exec: We Don't Want to Police Content, IP Democracy 2/1/2008
- 2008: The Battle For ISP Piracy Filters - AT&T is up for it...which ISP is next?, dslreports 1/24/2008
- Free Speech and Net Neutrality: Separating Fact from Fiction, ACLU 1/24/2008
- AT&T Filtering: Has Tim Wu Not Been Paying Attention?, Peerflow 1/22/2008
- Why AT&T's Plans To Filter The Internet Will Only Do More Harm To AT&T (And Everyone Else), Techdirt 1/22/2008
- 3 Things on AT&T's Proposed Net Filtering Plan, EFF 1/22/2008
- NBC Universal Explains Why ISPs Should Filter Copyrighted Works, Techdirt 1/17/2008
- Is AT&T Siding With NBC To Get Rid Of Neutrality?, Techdirt 1/11/2008
Content :: Advertisements
Prior to 1890, a telephone subscriber had to use an
operator in order to set up a call. The subscriber would pick up the
telephone and tell the operator who they wanted to call. But what if
the telephone operator was the wife of a funeral home owner? When
people needed a funeral home, she could direct all the calls to her
husband. At least, that's what Amon
Stowger thought was happening. Every problem has a solution.
Stowger's solution was to invent the electronic switch which would
eliminate the necessity of an operator in order to set up a call.
Subscribers could now pick up the phone and dial it themselves. Stowger
reportedly remarked, "No longer will my competitor steal all my
business just because his wife is a BELL operator."
Content :: Blocking
- Korean
Internet TV battle turns ugly, ITNews Nov 6, 2006 (rival Korean
ISPs reportedly block access to HanaroTV)
- Telus v Voices for Change
- Telus
removes blocking from VFC website, Voices for Change Aug 8, 2005
- Telus Blocks Consumer Access to
Labour Union Web Site and Filters an Additional 766 Unrelated Sites, OpenNet
Initiative Aug 2, 2005
- Telus
Breaks Net Provider Cardinal Rule, Michael Giest Aug 1, 2005
- Phone
company blocks access to telecom union's website, Boing Boing July
24, 2005
- TELUS
censors customers by denying access to Voices for Change, Voices
for Change July 23, 2005
- Telus
cuts subscribers access to pro-union website, CBC News July 24, 2005
- Craigslist
AT&T and PearlJam
- Jamming the Pearl, Lessig Blog (Aug 10, 2007)
- Pearl Jam censored by AT&T, calls for a neutral 'Net, Ars Technica (Aug 9, 2007)
- Lines Censored: "
Pearl Jam's performance of their big 90's hit "Daughter" morphed into the melody from Pink Floyd's "The Wall," and Eddie Vedder served up a pair of anti-Bush lyrics to the tune. "George Bush, leave this world alone," he sang. "George Bush, find yourself another home." "
- Somehow I Don't Think Pearl Jam/AT&T is the Shot Heard 'Round the World, Tech Liberation Front 8/21/2007
- FCC's Copps Speaks Out On Pearl Jam Controversy, Tech Daily Dose 8/21/2007
- AT&T Censored Other Bands, Too - Isolated incident apparently not so isolated..., DSLreports 8/15/2007
- AT&T admits it censored other bands, CNET 8/15/2007
- Oops, They Did It Again, PK 8/15/2007
- AT&T's Blue Room Censors Pearl Jam - Starts network neutrality scuff-up..., DSLreports 8/14/2007
- AT&T Censors Pearl Jam . . . and?, Isen 8/14/2007
- Did ATT censor Pearl Jam and can we trust them with the Internet?, Future of Music 8/14/2007
- AT&T Plays Gatekeeper. Censors Pearl Jam., Save the Internet 8/14/2007
Content :: Blocking :: Messaging
NARAL v Verizon
- NARAL and the Christian Coalition Ask Verizon: Can You Hear Us Now?, Save the Internet 10/23/2007
- What Were They Smoking Down at the Precinct?, NOW 10/18/2007
- Free Speech Souldn't End at Verizon's Door, Save the Internet 10/2/2007
- The Verizon/NARAL Flap And Lessons for NARAL (and all the rest of you advocacy orgs out there), Tales from the Sausage Factory 10/2/2007
- Verizon Tempts Fate, Blocks Naral's Message, IP Democracy 9/27/2007
- Verizon Rejects Messages of Abortion Rights Group, NYT 9/27/2007
- Verizon Blocks Pro-Choice Text Messaging, Save the Internet 9/27/2007
- At least 25 countries around the world block websites for political, social or other reasons as governments seek to assert authority ..., USA Today 5/18/2007
- What Were They Smoking Down at the Precinct?, NOW Oct 16, 2007
- Verizon's Tauke and Retribution Against NARAL, Open Left Sept 27, 2007
- Verizon Rejects NARAL Pro-Choice America's Text Messaging Program, Medical News Today Oct 1, 2007
Content :: Traffic Redirection
- See Strowger Switch (where telephone operator reported diverted telephone traffic from Strowger, a funeral home operator, to her husband who was a competitive funderal home - which resulted in Strowger inventing the automatic switch)
Content :: Criticizing the Service
Provider
- Verizon : Terms of
Service Attachment A 3.
- "You may NOT use the Service as follows: .... (j)
to damage the name or reputation of Verizon,
its parent, affiliates and subsidiaries, or any third parties; "
- AT&T : Terms of Service: AT&T may suspend your account and all service "for conduct that AT&T believes"..."(c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries."
Content :: Filtering
Filtering Bad Traffic
Networks may seek to filter traffic that is either
defective (ie., misconfigured routers, corrupt DNS or routing tables)
or maliciouos (ie., a DOS attack, worm, spam,
phishing).
Filtering DOS Attacks:
Remedies:
- Identify the attack source and filter packets based
on source, however, the source of an attack can be spoofed and the
attack can be distributed among a multitude of zombies.
- Ingress and egress filtering to ensure that packets
that depart from a network are not spoofed, improving the ability to
accurate identify an attack and also increasing the dissincentive from
launching an attack from a source for fear of being identified.
Two Tiered Net
- BT Halts Excessive
Downloading, Wired 3/28/2006
- A Two-Tiered Internet in
Our Future?, Free Press 1/13/2006
- Boucher on Two-Tier
Fight - Triple-player broadband competition necessary, Broadband
Reports 3/9/2006
- Internet 'Fast
Lane' Could Carry Heavy Toll, Ecommerce Times 3/7/2006
- Beware
of a Two-Lane Internet, BWO 3/7/2006
- AT&T
deal puts focus on Net fees, USA Today 3/7/2006
- Senator
wants to ban 'fast lane' for Web, CNET 3/2/2006
- Senator Would
Ban Web Tolls, Red Herring 3/2/2006
- QoS Tariff Debate
Crosses the Pond - Deutsche Telekom wants content providers to pay up,
Broadband Reports 2/17/2006
- Germany
joins calls to end Google's 'free lunch', NWNetflash 2/17/2006
|
