Comcast Faces Lawsuit Over Home Wi-Fi Routers

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mike Coberly

Honorable
Jun 24, 2013
73
0
10,640
1
Motorola Surfboard user here, [language edited by Moderator] Comcast and their $7 a month fee to "lease" garbage hardware to "customers".

Watch what say,
Lutfij


EDIT: I won't curse if you learn proper grammar
 
Fix nearly every problem with broadband in the U.S. once and for all. Just declare cable monopolies illegal - require local governments to allow more than one cable TV/internet provider.

The moment you have competition, customers will get to vote with their dollars when their cable TV company tries to pull a shenanigan like this. Same goes for intentionally degrading Netflix service to extort Netflix into paying up. They'd only succeed in driving their customers to a competitor which doesn't degrade Netflix.
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212
Those all in one router/wireless/cable modem are also very easily exploited by former Comcast support people. They know administrative access into that router and can hack into your home network fairly easily. They can also be turned into mail servers for spammers. Welcome to the world of being used as a patsy for every scum bucket who cares to exploit you, and paying for the electricity for their legal and illegal activities.

I'm, unfortunately, a Comcast customer, but I use my own modem and router. I advise everyone I know to do the same. Spread it around.
 

gamerxavier

Distinguished
Apr 4, 2011
541
0
19,010
12
American ISPs of all sorts are right of their with those damn oil companies. Controlling **** all over the place. I really hope the FCC votes to make them a utility.
 

jalek

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2007
524
1
18,995
1
I guess it might matter in San Francisco. I saw the public network show up, but the router's range ends before my driveway, so anyone using it would have to be sitting on my porch.
 

Nick Fetty

Reputable
Dec 9, 2014
1
0
4,510
0
The second channel coming from the router is not free requires a subscription to Xfinity, (to read pay Comcast more) to use, it does come bundled with some of their Internet packages but not all of them, and lastly Its offered as a standalone product also, at least where I'm from that's how it is and all the xfinity wifi in town requires Comcast ID password to use it. This is where I ended, I could write for hours about the evils of Comcast but now I'll stop before I get ahead of myself.
 

firefoxx04

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,371
1
19,660
144
Yeah screw comcast. We rent their crappy router and pay per month for it. I had the tech set it up so it acts only as a modem so we can use our own router.

Comcast rarely treats their customers well. My grilfriends grandma is using a regular COAX cable from her comcast box to her TV.. and she pays for HD tv and watches the HD channels yet they are displayed in a lower res because the comcast tech did not use an HDMI cable when he installed the setup. This is common everywhere. Dont get me started with their local shops where you come to drop off equipment. Its like the DMV. Take a ticket, stand in line for an hour just for some idiot behind the counter to bs you.

Comcast is a joke.
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4
I live in a Cox area. Suck it Comcast users.
BTW, I really don't see whats wrong here. Must be a San Francisco thing to be butt hurt over 2 or 3 watts. I don't mean to troll or be mean, I just think this lawsuit is rather petty and is probably done to make a couple bucks.
Most cable companies are moving to City Wide Wifi, and this will more than likely be part of its implementation. Particularly it will be for the customer at that address in order to stream line joining networks outside the home. Most people are not tech savvy and will probably have trouble connecting to a City Wide Wifi network from their home network, or it could potentially fight with the home network in cases where the home network signal is weak verse a wireless router setup at a tap.
 

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
0
This explains everything that is wrong with America, suing anything not nailed down. Comcast should change its TOS and mail to all its customers. Tell them they have till X date to opt out or STFU.
 

v90k

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2012
96
1
18,665
7
And I bet you guys didnt know that same crappy device only supports up to 6 simultaneous wireless connections before it starts dropping some of your devices or giving you connection probs. And the same device bought from a store doesn't have that problem.
 

Comcast holds a monopoly in most areas where they provide service. They cannot tell customers to opt out because the terms of their monopoly service contract with the city/county state they must provide service to everyone who requests it.

The problem is because of the monopoly, the customer has no recourse when they don't like the service terms offered by Comcast. There's no way for customers to influence Comcast services or policies like there would be if there were competition.
 

mackster52

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2010
1
0
18,510
0
if some people are big downloaders & going over there 250 data cap, why cant you log into the public wifi hotspot & download for free since comcast says that data doesn't count against your usage caps, just curious. this feature might have it's pluses & minuses
 

gggplaya

Distinguished
They have a regional monopoly for a reason, someone had to build the network and infrastructure. Take away the monopoly, who's going to maintain that infrastructure?? Who's going to run new lines to new roads and developments??? All of which costs lots of money. Cable tv itself is very high in price, but much of that comes from tv stations wanting more money in their contracts with comcast.

Cable internet however, i think comcast is very price competitive, at least in my area where you can't get FIOS because we aren't dense enough for verizon to run fiber optic lines. But $30-$55 a month for high speed internet isn't bad. I remember when AOL dialup internet was like $23 a month, that's was back in the 90's. Add inflation, and $30 for a solid connection with decent speed isn't asking alot.
 

gsxrme

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2009
253
0
18,780
0
I'm personally using the SB6121 modem and WRT1900AC router

before I had my own equipment. Netflix had troubles streaming. Comcast has their fingers deep in $hit this time.
 

g00fysmiley

Distinguished
Apr 30, 2010
2,175
0
19,860
37
I have been seeing these pop up in my city Tallahassee, FL I am a comcast customer but really all it does is force me to turn my wifi off to use LTE, it is very spotty and cannot handle handoffs like a cell tower can, the tech is nto ready for prime time, but is at least an interesting concept. I use comcast hence being able to log into said network, but I use my own modem and router (used to rent one but it was docsis2 and comcast would not let me swap it for a docsis3 so I gave it back , they seemed surprised for some reaosn) I am actually fairly happy with thier service but I would not complain if there was competition in my area, I choose comcast or prism which caps at 5 mbs. Still given the lack of competition the $70 i pay for basic 70 channel cable (which i actually have not used in months) with HBO and 50 mbs connection seems reasonable given that they could charg eme out the nose because i do not have a real choice and need a fast connection for online school.
 

lestatkatt

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
1
0
4,510
0
So how does a Comcast customer Join in on this class action lawsuit? Who would they contact? I got one of their new routers a couple months ago. Noticed the Public Wifi. I asked them to shut it down. They claimed they turned it off, but it's still active and I have made numerous calls to comcast about it. I want in! Please post some contact info to the law firm. Thanks!
 

RCguitarist

Distinguished
My company! Although you have to be in Central Arkansas to get our service. We do fixed wireless broadband and practice complete net neutrality and and never do shady stuff like that.
 

Darkk

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2003
615
0
18,980
0
I have Comcast in S.F. Area and own my modem and router so I am not affected by this nonsense. If they want to offer customers WiFi then install dedicated equipment OUTSIDE the customer's homes.
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212


I've seen someone camp out on the side of someone house, hiding behind the bushes, for two days tapping into their internet.

I once saw a homeless guy in a van park in a corporate parking lot with a directional antenna tapping into their wireless network, too. (The van was parked there for almost a week before anyone investigated and actually noticed a person in there. He had four computers run off a generator on the roof.) Nobody with a regular computer could get a signal that far away from the building, but that guy could. The police came and shooed him out of the parking lot, but he parked around the corner, still within range. Since he was in a legal public parking area, the police could do nothing about him. We ended up turning off wireless for three days until he want away.

In short, you need to be really careful with your wireless and monitor the devices that connect on a regular basis.
 

This was true in the past, and is still true in some areas. Usually the monopoly was granted in exchange for a service guarantee. The city feared that if left to the market, only the affluent areas would be judged cost-effective to roll out cable, and lower income areas would never get cable. So they granted a single company a monopoly in exchange for a guarantee that all areas of the city, including lower income areas, would get service. But times have changed and even low-income areas are profitable now (how many low income people do you know who don't have internet?). In the last city I lived in, the monopoly was a straight payola scam. The city "sold" the monopoly cable service rights to the company willing to kick back the most $ back to the city per home wired.

Currently, in most areas, competing cable companies would be eager to install their own cable alongside the existing monopoly cable company under the same monopoly terms. When I was living in a Boston suburb, the city decided to allow a second cable company. The moment that decision was made, even before the second cable company had begun laying down cable, the existing cable company cut my TV+internet bill $10/mo (from $80 to $70 - so more than 10%).

What you say is still true for disperse suburban and rural areas. They're generally not cost-effective to wire up unless they're subsidized by denser suburban and urban areas. But you have to judge whether the harm being done to the vast majority of people living in urban and suburban areas by these cable monopolies is worth guaranteeing people in rural areas have cable TV/internet service. As technology improves, more and more rural areas become cost-effective to wire up, and the monopolies become more and more detrimental to society.

I actually think we're beyond the point where cable TV+internet should just be turned into a utility. Having lots of different cable companies made sense when the industry was first starting up. Nobody knew the best way to wire up homes, the best way to distribute signals, and (for Internet) the best way to allow upstream signals. The free market is a great way to solve nebulous problems like that, and you needed the different cable companies which were willing to try different ideas to figure out what worked best.

But at this point, most cable TV distribution schemes are standardized. Most of them use the same DOCSIS modems for Internet. And I think it's clear to everyone that the endgame is fiber to the home. Just make it a utility and run it like gas or electricity. One company gets a contract to lay down and maintain the pipes, but they're prohibited from selling what's carried by the pipes. Instead, the homeowner is allowed to pick who provides the service from multiple competing companies (like you can pick from multiple long distance, gas, and in some places electric companies).
 

compa008

Distinguished
Dec 13, 2011
39
0
18,540
1
Honestly having WiFi Hotspots is a really great idea. The problem however is that Comcast is (a) Charging customers such a high bill and then sticking them with the energy costs. They should actually give customers a discount to compensate them for the energy use. (b) They should be much more secure. (c) They need to send every client that uses these Comcast modem/routers an updated TOU.

Also the downside of breaking up companies like Comcast and declaring them a public utility is that unions will try and root themselves in at the basic level and you'll be praying for Comcast when it's all said in done. Pesky unions depriving people of better choices. So sick have having to pick between two devils.
 

a1r

Reputable
Aug 6, 2014
41
0
4,540
2
@jalek

I have a directional high gain yagi antenna and a legal limit NIC that would say otherwise. Just because *you* may not be able to use it beyond your driveway probably speaks more to the limitations of your hardware and knowledge of radio communications than any real limitations on others with higher end equipment. You know, like those guys looking for untraceable (for them) wifi hotspots. Takes all of $60, if that.

"I guess it might matter in San Francisco. I saw the public network show up, but the router's range ends before my driveway, so anyone using it would have to be sitting on my porch. "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY