Is throttling of peer-to-peer traffic — particularly BitTorrent traffic — on Comcast’s cable Web service “reasonable network management” or a breach of trust? That was the question at the Federal Communications Commission’s hearing Monday in Cambridge, Mass.

The FCC met at Harvard Law School in response to petitions from a consortium of public-interest groups and World Wide Web video company Vuze. The petitions accused Comcast of violating the FCC’s four Web policy principles, which boil down to allowing consumers to use the Web without interference from service providers. An exception to the principles is “reasonable” network management and the hearing focused on whether Comcast’s actions were fair.

Grilling Comcast

By the end of the day, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said he hadn’t come to a conclusion, but he told reporters later, “One of the main concerns I have is that there wasn’t a transparency to some of the network-management practices (Comcast) engaged in.”

The highlight of the hearing,

which included panels on policy and technology issues, was Martin’s grilling of Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen. Martin asked Cohen why Comcast thinks it “necessary to block” BitTorrent when customers “are acting within the constraints you sold them. … Doesn’t that undermine the arguments you’re making?”

No, Cohen responded, “I don’t think we’re restraining the customers from using the service in accordance with the way we’re selling it to them.” He said Comcast gave subscribers fair notice of the practice in a FAQ on its Web site. “Comcast may on a limited basis temporarily delay undoubtful P2P traffic when that traffic has or is projected to have an adverse effect on other customers’ use of the service,” Cohen read from the notice.

Finding the Line

Is that sufficient notice to consumers and developers? No way, said Marvin Ammori, general counsel for Free Press, one of the groups that petitioned…

Orginal post by Top Tech News