Comcast Throttling Test; To Follow Time Warner’s ‘Pay Per Gigabyte’?

Comcast begins testing a new ‘protocol agnostic’ throttling approach to slow down connections of active users and putting them on a blacklist. Is this the convenient way of eliminating Net Neutrality?

Comcast announced that they will begin testing a new “protocol agnostic” throttling approach in two markets (Chambersburg, Pennsylvania and Warrenton, Virginia) which started Thursday that sounds like it will be a less harsh approach than their partner Time Warner. Is it really? Is this the convenient way of eliminating Net Neutrality which allows you to go where you want and do what you want online. While Comcast will slow down connections of its most active users and putting them on a blacklist, Time Warner will charge customers extra money at the beat of $1.00 per gigabyte for exceeding their bandwidth caps for the plan that they are on.

In addition, the company has also updated their website network terms to reflect their new network management trial which will manage bandwidth use and congestion. In the terms, Comcast stated, they will focus on bandwidth consumption activity of individual customers who are contributing to congestion on Comcast’s network which does not include protocol or content being used by customers. This trial is expected to run for 30 days.

Reportedly current subscribers shouldn’t see no change in their Internet service or be affected, and only a small percentage of users during periods of network congestion will be affected. Letters are expected to be going out to customers as well as additional information should be posted on their site soon.

In related news, Los Angeles city attorney’s office is preparing to sue Time Warner, Comcast’s partner for poor service and causing “major havoc and distress”. City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo stated on Wednesday that Time Warner violated state law by making false and misleading statements to subscribers in a 25-page lawsuit which included that they violated its franchise agreement. The claim goes on to say that the company had subscribers on hold for hours with customer service reps and had excessive repair delays.