<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Comcast vs. Your Torrents: A Recap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 02:10:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comcast-NBCU: An Oil Spill Waiting to Happen?</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/#comment-460465</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Comcast-NBCU: An Oil Spill Waiting to Happen?]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=4612#comment-460465</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] participants also referenced Comcast&#8217;s past BitTorrent throttling measures as proof that the company is willing to interfere with competitive content distribution methods. [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] participants also referenced Comcast&#8217;s past BitTorrent throttling measures as proof that the company is willing to interfere with competitive content distribution methods. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Decade in Online Video, Part 2: Time to Upload</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/#comment-460464</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Decade in Online Video, Part 2: Time to Upload]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 08:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=4612#comment-460464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] the site to pay $110 million in damages. However, P2P fans had something to celebrate as well when the FCC ordered Comcast to stop interfering with its customers&#8217; BitTorrent traffic, something the cableco complied [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the site to pay $110 million in damages. However, P2P fans had something to celebrate as well when the FCC ordered Comcast to stop interfering with its customers&#8217; BitTorrent traffic, something the cableco complied [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How Much Are Your P2P Packets Worth? To Comcast, $16 or Less</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/#comment-460463</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[How Much Are Your P2P Packets Worth? To Comcast, $16 or Less]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=4612#comment-460463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] Comcast got itself into hot water two years ago when it was found to actively interfere with P2P file transfers, which led to an FCC investigation into its network management practices and raised the ire of consumer watchdog groups. In the summer of 2008, the FCC ordered the cable company to cease its P2P throttling by the end of the year or face an immediate injunction. (Our full recap can be found here.) [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Comcast got itself into hot water two years ago when it was found to actively interfere with P2P file transfers, which led to an FCC investigation into its network management practices and raised the ire of consumer watchdog groups. In the summer of 2008, the FCC ordered the cable company to cease its P2P throttling by the end of the year or face an immediate injunction. (Our full recap can be found here.) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Canadian Content Producers Take a Stand for Net Neutrality</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/#comment-460462</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Canadian Content Producers Take a Stand for Net Neutrality]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 04:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=4612#comment-460462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] BitTorrent throttling is very similar to what Comcast tried in the U.S. until it got forced by the FCC to stop interfering with torrent transmissions. However, the [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] BitTorrent throttling is very similar to what Comcast tried in the U.S. until it got forced by the FCC to stop interfering with torrent transmissions. However, the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Comcast: How We&#8217;ve Been Slowing Down BitTorrent &#171; NewTeeVee</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/comcast-vs-your-torrents-a-recap/#comment-460461</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Comcast: How We&#8217;ve Been Slowing Down BitTorrent &#171; NewTeeVee]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=4612#comment-460461</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] That doesn&#8217;t sound to effective, does it? Apparently, it isn&#8217;t. The filing also reveals that Comcast is still seeing around 50 percent of its upstream bandwidth consumed by P2P applications. In some areas, file swapping even causes up to two-thirds of all upstream bandwidth. Comcast stated in an earlier filing with the FCC that it was necessary to use these technologies because otherwise 80 percent of the bandwidth would be consumed by 20 percent of its users. Maybe getting that number down to 60-some percent wasn&#8217;t really worth all that uproar. [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] That doesn&#8217;t sound to effective, does it? Apparently, it isn&#8217;t. The filing also reveals that Comcast is still seeing around 50 percent of its upstream bandwidth consumed by P2P applications. In some areas, file swapping even causes up to two-thirds of all upstream bandwidth. Comcast stated in an earlier filing with the FCC that it was necessary to use these technologies because otherwise 80 percent of the bandwidth would be consumed by 20 percent of its users. Maybe getting that number down to 60-some percent wasn&#8217;t really worth all that uproar. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

