back to article Comcast to pay $16m over BitTorrent busting

Comcast has agreed to pay $16m to settle a class action suit brought against the company after it was caught secretly busting BitTorrents. Filed by a California man in November 2007, the suit claims that Comcast's BitTorrent busting violated federal computer-fraud laws and user contracts. In a proposed settlement, the US cable …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Bittorrent or Lotus Notes?

That's an interesting combination.

What happens if you tried to use both of them - do you qualify for $32?

0
0
Sly
FAIL

drop in the bucket

$16M for Comcast is a drop in the bucket, so to speak. It's like you or me having to pay a late fee on a library book. Ok, we're out $2 cause it was a month late. oh well.

0
0
Badgers

Lotus Notes

It would take a lot more than $16 to ease the pain of having to use Lotus Notes.

3
1
Boffin

OK, but...

The newer versions of Notes aren't too bad (I have to work with it everyday) and at least you're not subject to the usual raft ot M$ virus threats.

Yes, I admit it could be more userfriendly (especially when you have Credant installed - don't get me started!) but it does have a habit of doing what t says on the tin - providing email. I'm not saying I'm their greatest fan but I don't hate it as much as other systems. (anyone remember Groupwise? PITA when anything went wrong, especially for the administrators)

Can't see what Notes and P2P have in common except for synchronising mail (replicating) and if that's their reason for blocking it then there's something fundamentally wrong with their 'filtering' since relipcating mail for an offline copy is a business requirement for many customers (another class action suit here I feel - and with a number of BIG financial corporates that could easily get involved)

The big corporates tend to pick the more obscure mail systems because of 2 main factors 1) contract tie in and 2) [I think these may be the smarter ones, if it's deliberate] the vastly reduced likelyhood/vulnerability of a major virus attack. for an ISP to block such traffic since it's not 'the norm' is as good as saying 'if it's not fully sanctionned by M$ then we don't want to know' which is not a good stance to have and they deserve to be slated/put out of business as is fit.

/rant

corporate politics - worse than national politics since it's global.

Anon since my job relies on it....

2
0
Anonymous Coward

What happens to the unclaimed money?

What happens to the rest of the money when people realize that isn't worth $16 to publicly admit and go on record that they engaged in seeding (hosting) material in many cases is illegal to distribute?

0
1
Pirate

But the question is...

Where do you put your claim in and is it worth the $16 of your time to do so? I also wonder if this list can (or will anyway) be sold to various unnamed pro-DRM associations of a certain software of music nature....

0
0
Thumb Down

pat on the wrist

Not even a slap on the wrist. $16M is way cheaper than fixing the problem. Business as usual.

1
0
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Get $16

Get sued for illegal file sharing - lose $160K or your liberty.

Bait and switch anyone?

0
0
Flame

The whole company should be broken up...

For lying to the US government and operating an effective monopoly. $16m fine? New boss, same as the old.

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums