Kevin Martin is upset that Comcast has challenged his authority by filing a lawsuit against the FCC for making up law out of thin air. The Chairman of the FCC expressed his scorn by releasing a statement that makes him sound like one of the dumbest men in America:
“Given Comcast’s past failure to disclose its network management practices to its customers, it is important Comcast respond to the many still-unanswered questions about its new management techniques,” Martin warned in a statement released this afternoon. Most notably, what exactly does Comcast mean when it says it will have a “protocol agnostic” management system in place by the end of the year?
And as for the bandwidth limits that Comcast has now announced: “How will consumers know if they are close to a limit?” Martin asked. “If a consumer exceeds a limit, is his traffic slowed? Is it terminated? Is his service turned off?”
Let’s see if we can help the Chairman:
1. The “end of the year” is December 31, at midnight. In urban areas, people will make noise and drink a lot. It would be good for Kevin Martin to be among them.
2. Comcast has said they’ll write a *very mean letter* to customers over the 250 GB limit and among the top 1% in bandwidth consumption. It was in the papers, but not on the funny page.
3. I won’t define “protocol agnostic” as that subject was covered, at length, the order the FCC’s lawyers wrote in the Comcast matter. Martin should have one of them explain it to him.
Where did Bush find this person?
One thought on “Kevin Martin threatens Comcast”
Interesting. When he testified before Congress this spring, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told the legislators that court challenges to FCC orders are routine. He said that it did not worry him that Comcast might challenge an order in this proceeding, and urged Congress not to take matters into its own hands and legislate.
Martin may have hoped that because the Commission's Order did not penalize Comcast, it would not challenge it. But Comcast cannot ignore it for two reasons. Firstly, it asserts jurisdiction in an area where the law says the FCC has none — promising more trouble in the future. What's more, if it were allowed to stand, would set a precedent of arbitrary and capricious enforcement of the Commissioners' whims without open, public rule making. In short, the Commission could become dictatorial. Comcast has to challenge the Order both for its own sake and for the good of the industry and consumers. (Yes, Comcast's interests are aligned with consumers' on this one.)