I'd like to share my thoughts on this.
I would generally define a server as a host which provides something
that another host desires. If one accepts this definition, then all
hosts participating in a torrent are taking on a server role, regardless
of the application architecture (client-server or peer-to-peer), and
could thus be considered to be servers. I'd have to agree with Cox on
this point.
That being said, I also think that a ToS which limits use to non-server
activity is ludicrous. That's like a phone service provider saying that
you can only talk about certain things on the phone. You're paying for a
certain bandwidth (pipe size), and what you do with it is of no concern
to the provider. On this point, you should prevail.
I'm no expert on the technical aspects, but I believe that the problem
for Cox is that when one customer saturates the line, other customers on
the same segment suffer. On the other hand, Qwest limits the speed on
each connection, so I expect that if you were using Qwest that you
wouldn't have this problem.
Just my nickels worth.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
On 01/07/2011 03:23 PM, Technomage Hawke wrote:
> I did,
> they called the torrent client a server (there is no winning with these guys!). I spent over an hour explaining to him and 2 supervisors what a server was and why a torrent client didn't qualify. then came the "sharing copyrighted content" argument. It took just 10 minutes to prove that this wasn't the case. I also mentioned that I am paying for the bandwidth and expect to be able to use it to its maximum. besides, their commercials promote downloading of music and videos (some of which may actually violate their own ToS).
>
> the last supervisor finally told me that he couldn't help. so I asked him to pass me along to someone who could. he gave me a number to corporate in atlanta.
>
> at this point, I now have it on record that
> 1. I am not violating any ToS
> 2. I am paying for the bandwidth I am supposed to be getting per their advertisements
> 3. I need to talk to corporate
> 4. everything got voice recorded on my end.
>
> I am going to call back on monday morning and see what I can do about this.
>
> -Eric
>
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Jordan Aberle wrote:
>
>> You should call cox, if the torrent is legal it shouldn't be an issue.
>> You are paying for your bandwidth so...
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Brian Weaver<bjweaver@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Here is a list of commercial seedbox sites, and there are many others.
>>> Perhaps something like this might work?
>>>
>>> http://filesharefreak.com/2009/01/19/complete-list-of-torrent-seedbox-services-part-ii/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Technomage Hawke
>>> <technomage.hawke@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> is there anyone in the valley that can offer an uncapped fat pipe for
>>>> hosting a seedbed? I am starting to look at this as an alternative. it seems
>>>> cox doesn't like me seeding a torrent (even if it is legal). They sent me a
>>>> bitch letter about a possible ToS violation. Something cheap per month and I
>>>> provide the box.
>>>>
>>>> -Eric
>>>>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)