backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 94 comment(s) - last by Christopher1.. on Feb 2 at 12:51 AM

Stunning new filtering plan contradicts its “Your World” marketing campaign

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson confirmed that the telecom and internet giant is “very interested” in a “technology based solution” to monitor data passing through its networks for rogue peer-to-peer traffic.

“It’s like being in a store and watching someone steal a DVD,” said Stephenson. “Do you act?”

Such a move would affect more than just AT&T’s subscribers, as the company’s network investments represent a sizable chunk of the internet’s backbone – which results in almost all Internet data passing through its network at some point. Given that AT&T has, so far, been pensive about the scope of such a project, many are assuming the worst.

More importantly, AT&T may forfeit its end of the deal in what Slate’s Tim Wu calls “the grand bargain of common carriage:” legal immunity from whatever claims might arise from data its network transports, in exchange for offering network service to anyone in a nondiscriminatory fashion. “AT&T's new strategy reverses that position and exposes it to so much potential liability that adopting it would arguably violate AT&T's fiduciary duty to its shareholders,” writes Wu.

In an absence of any official word on why AT&T wants to implement such a project, many people think that the primary motivator is an alarmed response to the growing percentage of traffic attributable to P2P activity; various surveys claim that anywhere from 30 to 90 percent of all internet traffic is P2P related. Lately, ISPs both large and small have been testing the waters with a variety of traffic-shaping initiatives, including Comcast, which last year found itself in the middle of a scandal over how it handles BitTorrent traffic.

According to AT&T – as well as anecdotal reports and commentary from other ISP employees – Internet users should expect a more managed Internet experience in the near future, as technology is finally becoming sophisticated enough to allow for such large-scale projects.

“We recognize we are not there yet but there are a lot of promising technologies,” said AT&T executive James Cicconi, “but we are having an open discussion with a number of content companies … to try to explore various technologies that are out there.”

If anyone has the expertise to deploy such a large filtering project, it would be AT&T: the company was already caught red-handed with powerful data-mining hardware, which it used to gather information on the nation’s web traffic for the NSA.

“The volume of peer-to-peer traffic online, dominated by copyrighted materials, is overwhelming. That clearly should not be an acceptable, continuing status,” said NBC Universal’s general counsel, Rick Cotton. “The question is how we collectively collaborate to address this.”



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Wrong analogy, AT&T
By AlexWade on 1/26/2008 1:13:37 PM , Rating: 4
"It’s like being in a store and watching someone steal a DVD," said Stephenson.

WRONG! A more correct analogy is "It's like being in a store and watching someone walk through who you suspect but cannot prove stole something from another store."

Glad I don't have AT&T for my internet. This sounds like they are sleeping with the RIAA and MPAA, because all 3 have no idea of reality.




RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Razgriz20 on 1/26/2008 1:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, its like they will be treating every user that goes through their network as a potential copyright infringer.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Christopher1 on 1/27/08, Rating: -1
RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By othercents on 1/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By masher2 (blog) on 1/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Alexstarfire on 1/26/2008 3:10:58 PM , Rating: 4
Too bad that the ISPs have no idea what is going over the wire. They monitor throughput and bandwidth usage, nothing more, until now that is. P2P is hardly illegal. Pirating? Yes. P2P? No way. Just because pirates happen to use P2P doesn't mean they should restrict P2P traffic. That's like restricting the OS or the CD/DVD drive just because pirates happen to use them as well. You'd never allow that.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By masher2 (blog) on 1/26/08, Rating: -1
RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/26/2008 4:03:06 PM , Rating: 3
I have a feeling this would result in many data streams especially of the P2P variety to start utilizing some sort of low level encryption, not enough to keep someone out, but enough to cause your systems to backlog if they had to decrypt every packet. Reading the number of packets in a short amount of time would require massive computational power if they were encrypted.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By kinnoch on 1/26/2008 4:34:30 PM , Rating: 2
Certain bitTorrent clients already do that. Azureus has a whole encrypted protocol and an option to only accept encrypted connections.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By ebakke on 1/26/2008 5:19:54 PM , Rating: 5
It seems that no matter what is implemented by AT&T (or Comcast, or anyone else), P2P technologies will adapt. Encryption, extra garbage packets, etc. will be used, and ironically, the effect will be more traffic, and a slower internet. Exactly the opposite of AT&T's claims.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By mendocinosummit on 1/26/2008 8:31:47 PM , Rating: 5
When they should be spending all those millions increasing bandwidth.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Christopher1 on 1/27/2008 5:21:58 AM , Rating: 1
That is the blunt truth here: they should be focusing on increasing bandwidth instead of moaning about people actually using the unlimited service that they give them.

Same thing with the movie, music and game companies: stop turning to DRM to solve a problem that is more because you are making poor quality games or are charging too much for a good quality game.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By RonLugge on 1/27/2008 5:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
A good point only reinforced by the fact that Stardock Games -- responsible for Galactic Civilization and GalCiv II, and publishing Sins of a Solar Empire -- does extremely well selling games with no DRM. The only "DRM" involved is the need for a valid CD key to download patches.

The other half of their success is the fact that most torrent sites (they have specifically named Pirate Bay as being the exception) remove pirated copies of their games when asked. Most companies just throw a fit, they don't bother asking.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By masher2 (blog) on 1/27/2008 10:21:45 PM , Rating: 3
> "Stardock Games...does extremely well selling games with no DRM."

Stardock is a tiny 30 man company, with most of their revenues deriving from business software. Their best-selling game is a port of an old 1993 turned-based title that's sold all of 75K copies...about 1/100 of what a hit like COD or Halo does. And, quite frankly, it's not something that's going to appeal to those who typically pirate games anyway.

Trying to claim they've done "extremely" well by selling DRM-free games isn't a very realistic comparison.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By hedron on 1/31/2008 2:18:36 PM , Rating: 1
That's one good side effect of piracy. Is that cloned crap like Halo and CoD doesn't sell well. I'm an avid PC gamer and am tired of descent games drowning in a sea of over-hyped and over-produced FPS. Maybe one day the retail industry will collapse and the casual gamer will stick to tetris and the hardcore community will go underground.


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By jconan on 1/27/2008 3:16:58 AM , Rating: 4
I agree. However on a different note. Can ATT decrypt packages legally without a search warrant? E.G. people's private communications like skype and VPN for telecommuter's (the future working class tend to be more of the commuter type) - wouldn't ATT be snooping/spying on company secrets if they did? Just by running a filter is technically like eavesdropping or spying?


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By jconan on 1/27/2008 5:49:55 AM , Rating: 2
doesn't the filtering technique work on the same principles as keylogging or wiretapping even though they are 2 separate techniques. (they are not working off a closed data but are actually tapping onto customer's line and gathering data without permission) keylogging storing information based on filter sequences and wiretapping listening or receiving communication signals from a voice/data device based on particular streams?


RE: Wrong analogy, AT&T
By Shoal07 on 1/29/2008 11:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
The government needs warrants. The Bill of Rights only protects you against the government and government actions. Corporations can do whatever they like, especially on their own networks, they just suffer when people no longer choose to use their services. Too many people think their protections in the Constitution are universal but they're only enforceable against the government.

Just like DailyTech could delete all of your posts, or all of the pro-sony posts, or anti-MS, whatever... You can't sue them for violating your First Amendment; they have no legal requirement to guarantee or provide you anything, unless you enter into a contract.


<