Thread: Sandvine
View Single Post
  #18  
Old 2007-09-03, 09:54 PM
Tubular
 
Re: Sandvine

I don't feel like registering at another forum. You seem to visit frequently, don't you have any info?

All I'm sayin is, with Sandvine, you can kill free trade with bittorrent on home connections. If you have a corporate multi-Mbps upload connection where you are running a legit business and pay for your virtually unlimited bandwidth, people seeding after completion isn't really a problem because you charge for downloads. You really don't need some Concast user's 40 kbps upload on your torrent in order to stay in business. If you are running a business with BT and charging for downloads, your ISP probably won't "sandvine" you. But with free trade, it sucks up all the bandwidth Concast can provide over their copper (not fiber optic) pipes. They figure that they are saving bandwidth as well as fighting copyright infringement. What Concast isn't considering is that there is a lot of legal bittorrent traffic, like here at TTD, Dime, and etree. They also aren't considering that people pay for their bandwidth. If people were charged different rates for different upload and download caps per month, that would be the most fair solution IMO.

So sandvine is a good thing in the eyes of big business because it cuts down on less than legal downloads, while allowing them to sell their products via BT. If the BT protocol were banned altogether by ISPs, they couldn't hawk movies with it. And legally, I don't know if they could ban and outlaw file sharing software.

Considering all this, uTorrent/BitTorrent Inc. has no incentive to create a client that fights sandvine, because they are in it for the money, and not free trade.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes