Guy Kicked Off Comcast For Using Too Many Cloud Services

from the why-broadband-caps-suck dept

One of the key concerns we've had about the rise of broadband caps is that they don't take into account the fact that more and more data and services are moving online. When companies put in place data caps -- such as Comcasts' 250 gigs or AT&T's 150 gigs, they always highlight how this really only impacts a tiny percentage of users. But, the truth is that as more things go online, and more data is moved to "the cloud," it's really not that hard to bump up against these caps... and apparently the penalties are harsh. Andre Vrignaud lost his Comcast account for going over 250 GB two months in a row, mainly from using various legal online services, including Pandora and Netflix. He had also switched to a new online backup service, and the initial upload used up a bunch of bandwidth. He did admit to downloading a few things via BitTorrent (a UK show not available in the US), but it seems clear that most of his internet usage was perfectly legitimate. And now he has no account, and Comcast won't let him back on for a year. They won't even let him buy a more expensive package.

Yes, his data usage may have been extreme, but these kinds of services are becoming more common, and as we start to see even more new services, there are going to be a lot more stories of people bumping up against these caps. The truth is that the ISPs could upgrade their networks to handle this traffic. And it's not even that hard to do so. But with these caps they don't have to move as fast, and can slow down improving things -- which is what Wall Street likes. It just sucks if you're someone who, you know, actually wants to use the internet for what it enables.

Filed Under: broadband cap, cloud
Companies: comcast

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    freak (profile), 14 Jul 2011 @ 7:13pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can't agree on this one


    We have two companies here, rogers and bell, that offer internet.

    My landlord has my apartment with aliant, and had his other with rogers.

    Had being past tense, because he cancelled on them when, for three consecutive months, they told him the apartment was over the 250GB limit that is actually a 50GB limit.
    Which is quite bad, because the line had been seasonally cancelled because he hadn't found any tenants for the apartment for that semester. The modem had been removed and stored at his house, the cable jacks were disabled because he decided to do electrical work while no one was living in the house, and the account was supposed to be, but wasn't, seasonally shut down.

    Now, if you can tell me how a house with no modem, no cable jacks and no electricity can use 250GB, (really 50GB), a month for three months, I'll give you a cookie.
    I will mail you a cookie. I'll make vegan cherry blast cookies, and mail you one.

    Turns out, if you look for complaints, this is a very common occurrence with rogers . . . with Bell, they just randomly send signals to the modem to throttle traffic down to .25/.01 mb down/up, until it's reset. In other words, constant disconnects from any online gaming ...

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.