Un-capping not illegal

Frequently asked questions, Classic threads, as well as interesting and informative topics from the SG Broadband Forums.
Locked
Violent

Un-capping not illegal

Post by Violent »

Hi folks ,,,i'm kind of new here and I saw an interesting post that I would like to comment on please, if thats ok ?

I just learned today from my lawyer that I was not going to be prosecuted by Road Runner for uncapping my modem. Yep you heard it right.

the story goes like this :

A few months ago I found a way to uncap my motorola cable modem. I had heard that it was impossible to do as everything was handled at the head end. Well this is true it is all handeled at the head end, however there is a hidden diagnostic mode in the motorola modem that motorola can access from on line if need be. In this diagnostic mode there is a setting that allows the motorola people to over ride any control from outside the modem - it however does this constantly in this special mode and allows proper modem functioning at the same time. Motorola accesses this mode thru a telnet type session. this session can be captured if you sniff the session with network software designed for this. this capture takes a little decoding but gives up the codes needed to turn this diagnostic mode on. I discovered this by accident when I called motorola tech support for a problem with something else. I just happened to mention to the tech that was helping me that "my other computer was on line with a cable motorola cable modem. While he was waiting for something else we had a short conversation , he asked "Hows that modem working for you, I have one too." I said It works ok I guess but...",,,he said "I can take a look at it for you if you want", I said No , I'll have to send it to you guys, besides it really belongs to the cable company." He said " Oh no, I can look at it from here. " . Of course I get this erie feeling but say ok. I have a home network and just happen to have been running some software that sniffs the network while doing some testing. So I have the sniffer running and he takes a look at the modem. Said he didn't see anything wrong. I get my other problem solved with motorola and say good by and thanks.
A few days later I get around to looking at the sniffer logs and I see the session from motorola, Now the lightbulb in my brain comes on. I study the log for a good two hours and decide to try a few codes from it. Lo and behold - This thing now d/l's at 1.2 MB sec and uploads at 500 K sec. Previously my d/l's were averaging 500 - 800 k/s which isn't too shabby, but the u/l max was 25 k/sec which is about normal for road runner cable. So anyway I run the cable modem in this special configuration for a couple months. Come home one day to find that i've been disconnected. I call about it and am told that I was disconnected for theft of service and refered to the legal department for further information. So I call legal and am told that they plan to prosecute.

Anyway about a week later I am served with a summons. I call my sister (she's the lawyer) and explain everything to her. Little hint here that I have learned from my sister - always tell your lawyer everything. Anyway she contacts Road Runner, they will not drop the prosecution they say because they feel that I should be made an example. I get to court. My sister makes the argument that the road runner literature that was used to sell the service , which becomes part of the contract, points out the "speeds up to..." statement as a selling point, that I bought the service, have paid the bill religiously, and was mearly excercising my rights under the original contract when I bought the Road Runner service. Road Runner and prosecutor points out that while the original selling point may have been considered part of the contract that to take something that is not clearly given in the contract is illegal and constitutes theft of service. case is continued while the judge ponders this.

Went back to court today and got the judges decision - Ruling : Not Guilty

Road Runner objected - prosecutor objected - Why ?

Judge says " The defendant excercised his rights under the contract as implied by the literature used to sell the service, and the literature that sold the service became part of the contract. While the literature does not specify any certain speed it also does not specify any certain limit other than the one theoricaly possible. The defendant did nothing but attempt to utilize the full extent of the service that he was sold. This does not constitute theft. Not Guilty. the defendant is released."

The judge then ordered Road Runner to turn the service back on. Road Runner refused, but this afternoon my service was back on when I got home after court, and i'm running again un-capped.

End of story - happy ending Image

So the moral of the story is this : If you run un-capped they will probably arrest you. But there is a way to beat it. Plain and simple I guess, Kids - dont try this at home, cause it is a big hassle.

P.S. Forgot this part. I did get arrested when I got the summons - kinda embarrasing- had to post bail. Only time in my life that I have ever talked with a police officer other than a traffic ticket.

[This message has been edited by Violent (edited 07-05-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Violent (edited 07-05-2000).]
Lex Luthor

Post by Lex Luthor »

Yeah, that really sounds worth it to get a little extra bandwidth.

Smart move.

Lex
TDBerry

Post by TDBerry »

That is a wild story. I wish I had that to tell at thanksgiving myself. I do agree the contracts are ussally a little "broad" ( thus the term broadband) I am looking forward to the future of internet speed...52" monitors 1GBps both ways 25 zigabyte HD...
vegasbill

Post by vegasbill »

That was only one Judge, a lower court ruling and I might not be so lucky. The law is based upon the PRUDENT man rule,and some judge might not feel that MY uncapping was prudent. My paperwork might not match yours.
I am very sure their lawyers are rewritting agreements this night! Now, what happens if they appeal? Your sister bless her, will have to now lose money to defend you again. Since I guess your case was for free? I am very willing to bet they will appeal this case to a higher court.With a restrainting order relieve, asking for you to cease.
By the way,where the cops nice to you?

------------------
Let It Ride !
Iceman

Post by Iceman »

yo violent, mind letting me take a look at your sniffer log? if u dont wanna post, email to icemam16@rocketmail.com


------------------
Ice--who could have thought of a better invention?
fanta

Post by fanta »

Interesting story. Maybe it can be put up on the stories section of this site? BTW, why did you un-cap your modem? Was it for the purpose of running a server? or just because you had the "need for speed?" It would be interesting to see the sniffer logs but then again it could be a pandoras box that maybe should be best kept a secret.
User avatar
Bouncer
Senior Member
Posts: 4834
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: OCONUS

Post by Bouncer »

Interesting story.

I wonder how broadly it applies though. I'm curious because the RR service I have has no specific contract. It's an "at will" service. Which means I can terminate the service at any time for any or no reason. And so can they.

I'm also curious as to why you called motorola tech support and why they didn't refer you back to RR. Finally I'm surprised that they didn't disconnect you for violation of the TOS, since most RR sites specifically prohibit use of packet sniffing software.

I guess I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to stop serving you in the not too distant future. I also wonder how much you would've paid in legal fees for another lawyer to handle your case.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

------------------
"Yeah Baby, YEAH!!!"
jmcoreymv

Post by jmcoreymv »

Hey Violent, you mind if i take a look at those sniffer logs? Email me at jmcoreymv@hotmail.com
Kip Patterson

Post by Kip Patterson »

Now, let's think about this a bit.

1) His packet sniffer can only see data that passes through the modem. Can't see what's on the cable side. So these special codes must be passed through the modem? Addressed to what port in the TCP/IP stack? The codes that you create get passed to the modem how?

2) Motorola modems are not capped. The flow to them is regulated by the Motorola headend.

3) This is "Violent"'s first posting to the board.

4) The legal department does not decide to prosecute. They file a criminal complaint and the local prosecutor decides to prosecute. Having filed a complaint, they shut up because it is a felony to use criminal charges to pursue a civil issue - this dates from the elimination of debtor's prisons.

5) The judge waits a day to issue a decision in a theft of service case?

6) An attorney allows this to be heard by a judge, not a jury?

7) A judge in a criminal case issues an order for a civil remedy?

Horsefeathers!

Post your name and the court in which this happened, and case number, please.

[This message has been edited by Kip Patterson (edited 07-06-2000).]
wee96

Post by wee96 »

You really expect him to post his name, Mr. 40 posts? Heh, you haven't been here all that long either, dont flame him. He's probably got a real interesting case here that we could all benefit from, or then again you could be right and he's full of mule dung.
Violent

Post by Violent »

Yes the police were very nice - they did not even cuff me.
Originally posted by Iceman:
yo violent, mind letting me take a look at your sniffer log? if u dont wanna post, email to icemam16@rocketmail.com


Iceman

Post by Iceman »

LOL! Whoa that sure is one helluva typo---lol heres the real one

iceman16@rocketmail.com

thanks

------------------
Ice--who could have thought of a better invention?
Kip Patterson

Post by Kip Patterson »

Yes, I do expect him to post his real name. I use mine in this and every forum I visit. If he really appeared in court (He says at one point he did and was found innocent, at another point that he was not prosecuted) it is a matter of public record.

I did not flame him, other than horsefeathers. He asserted several things not consistent with the law or with court practice. Read carefully what is said "Roadrunner objected" - how? they cannot have any standing in this case, cannot have an attorney present to object.

500k uploads? The entire channel bandwidth is 191k for a Motorola modem.
wee96

Post by wee96 »

Got me on that one Image
Violent

Post by Violent »

Mr patterson, Sir:

1)I was sniffing my internal network configuration (router - hub -switches etc..) this is not a violation of the agreement as long as i do not sniff beyound the cable modem. Evidently you do not realize that your cable modem activity is passed thru your NIC which is part of ---come on now---right! you guessed it, your internal network! Why ? because its on the computer side of the modem. A problem with the switch - hub - router combo was the reason for the call to motorola. You are correct (and I think I stated this in my original post) that the speed is capped at the headend. but someway or another these codes allowed the modem to ignor the head end. BTW the way the speed is capped is by command from the headend to the modem, this is the reason that some u/l's will start off fast then immediately settle down to what the head end wants you to have. I do not know how these codes work, they just did.

2) this was a criminal matter and was tried as such . In my state I can choose to waive a trial by jury which I did and can also choose to have the trial immdiately before the arraignment judge , which I did.

3) This one is just a side not: had you done your homework you would have found out that there is still one state in which it is legal to imprison a person for debts. that state is Louisianna. Their state law is based upon the napoleonic code , not the codified code accepted by the other 49 states. Also indentured servitude is still legal in Louisianna tho it is not practiced because of the constitution.I'm not in Louisianna but I lived down there long enough to know this.

4) Any judge in my state can issue an order to restore property to its righful owner. In effect you are renting the cable service, but state law requires the "land lord" (road runner) notify the renter before he enters the property. he does not need permission he just has to notify. Since the contract requires that Road Runner (time Warner) owns the service then in effect you are renting. They did not notify me before depriving me of items ,I had already paid for, as required by law. Also their case was without foundation because they deprived me of property without cause (constitution)because of this.

5)As a side note here: it is not a felony to use a civil case to pursue a criminal charge. It is introduced as evidence as sworn testimony and vice versa. Case in point - OJ simpsons trial, while they did the criminal first, the opposite could have been true - depends on the state.

6) because I had waived my right to trial by jury the court system in my state is required to wait 24 hours before rendering a decision. This is why the judge waited a day to give his decision.

7) The case can not be appealed because there was no foundation. You need a foundation in law to appeal.

8) in a criminal case in my state the "victims" have a right to object to rulings. The victim here was Road Runner. the original complaintant can also choose not to pursue prosecution and 99% of the time the prosecutors office goes along with it because they know that without the complaintant there is no case.

So the long and short of it is this; under law I was deprived of my rightful property without due process (because the charge was without foundation). The only contract that is valid is the one I originally signed, The contract changes and service agreement changes that came after do not apply because I never signed them as required that I must do before they are valid under state law. As a result I mearly excercised my rights under a valid contract to use the service that I was sold to its fullest potential.

Now, this is sort of a abridged version, I will not go into it any more but I am considering a lawsuit against them for wrongful prosecution, depriving me of my rightful property without due process (because I was renting it I have a rightful property interest), publicly humilliating me by having me arrested. Defamation of character. Two of these are criminal matters but can be tried under civil law because they involve civil right issues.

Thanks for your response. You must work for a cable company or something. remember if you do - its not your money its theirs so why should you sweat it. Also- am I stealing something ? Nope I dont think so right now because while i did not origionally know that using these codes would uncap the thing, I will continue to use them and still do today (and they know it and dont do anything about it now because they cant - bet they will not make it public either because

1> the asswholes could have contacted me and let me know they wre displeased. I would have stopped it in a "Good Neighbor" sort of way. But do they do this ,,,NOPE! they have to have me arrested just to set an example. Wrong way to do things regardless of what you may think.

2> they broke the law by doing it the way they did. I am also going to contact the DA's office to find out why they pursued this matter when it was a clear violation of the law to do so.

3> according to the contract and my states laws - I did nothing illegal. Morally I did nothing wrong because ,,,I paid for it!
User avatar
ExarKun
Posts: 1118
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 12:00 am
Location: Under The Police Station

Post by ExarKun »

Violent
Fantastic job! , Im glad someone beat the system again .. its been way to long, since that has been done.
flurry

Post by flurry »

wow
could i please see the log too

wk@one.true-god.org

good job, violent

i have motorola cybsurfr cable with 50KB/s down and 16KB/s upload caps
flurry

Post by flurry »

my speed caps are liking having a wedding ring around your genitals
Violent

Post by Violent »

Uhhh,,,you did not read correctly I guess.

the whole channel bandwidth for a motorola cable modem I do not know right off, per motorolas specs for this particular modem the speed is capable of up to 27 MB/s. The speed is limited at - you guessed it- the head end. No cable company in their right mind or in their technical capacity has the equipment or technology available to give each user 27 Mb/s. bandwidth is mearly a function of how big a pipe is, it does not determine how fast you move thru the pipe. Like a 4 lane highway may be 4 lanes wide but other then traffic - the condition of your vehicle - posted speed limit -etc... is there anything that limits how fast you travel on it? bandwidth and speed are two different things. I think you are incorrect on the bandwidth limit, and i'm not even going to look it up, but even if it is 191k, it is still capable of letting the traffic pass thru it at any attainable speed unhindered that is by other objects. people always confuse bandwidth with speed, they are two different items, bandwidth defines how big something is, speed determins how fast something moves thru it. I never said I changed the bandwidth, I said that the speed increased. case in point, a 56 K isdn connection moves data slower then a 56 K frame relay setup. Same bandwidth but the speed is different - think about it.

And no I am not going to post my real name. It is not a real wise move in this day and age. As far as you knowing the details of the what where and when, its none of your business. If you'd learn to do your homework properly, you would have already found it. It is a matter of public record. Every thing I posted is consistant with the laws in my state. Oh you studied law, well you wasted your money because you have been wrong in every assumption because one of the first things they teach you in law school is not to assume.
Originally posted by Kip Patterson:
Yes, I do expect him to post his real name. I use mine in this and every forum I visit. If he really appeared in court (He says at one point he did and was found innocent, at another point that he was not prosecuted) it is a matter of public record.

I did not flame him, other than horsefeathers. He asserted several things not consistent with the law or with court practice. Read carefully what is said "Roadrunner objected" - how? they cannot have any standing in this case, cannot have an attorney present to object.

500k uploads? The entire channel bandwidth is 191k for a Motorola modem.


[This message has been edited by Violent (edited 07-06-2000).]
mithraug

Post by mithraug »

Well, since everyone else is asking I figured I might as well also. Could you send me a copy of those logs as well. My ICQ number is 66460285.

I am using the Motorola Cybersurfer on AT&T@home in CA. I am thoroughly sick of that stupid upload cap. Especially since it means when the U/L is at max, the D/L is at minimum. Thanks a lot.
Kip Patterson

Post by Kip Patterson »

Let's stick with one unit of measure. You said in your initial message that you achieved speeds of:
"This thing now d/l's at 1.2 MB sec and uploads at 500 K sec."

I take that to be bytes. The capacity of the cable channel to which the modem is connected is 27 mbits, shared among all modems on that transmitter in the head end. Each individual user can potentially get 10 megabits, or 1.25 megabytes including overhead. I've never seen a 10 mb ethernet network at anything like 1.2 mbytes.

The upstream channel is 1.536 megabits, again, shared among all modems on that receiver in the head end. That's 191 kbytes.

The upstream channel differs from the downstream channel in that it is polled. All active users are permitted to transmit in rotation, so it is difficult in the face of traffic to get a large percentage of the upstream bandwidth.

The manuals for the system are available at:
http://www.mot.com/MIMS/Multimedia/manuals/index.html

As you will note, the downstream flow is managed actively by the headend, not the modem. You cannot do anything to the modem to overcome the limits set by the head end.
Violent

Post by Violent »

This what you trying to say ?:

CyberSURFR Specifications.
Interfaces:
10BaseT Ethernet Connector
HFC Drop Connector: Female "F" Type

RF Specifications:
Transmitter
Bandwidth: 600 kHz
Data Signaling Rate: 768 kbps
Symbol Rate: 384 ksym/sec
Modulation: pi/4-DQPSK
Transmit Frequency Range: 6 MHz - 42 MHz w/dynamic frequency agility
Input Impedance: 75 Ohms (nominally)
Dynamic Range: 24 - 55 dBmV

Receiver
Bandwidth: 6 MHz
Data Signaling Rate: 30 Mbps
Symbol Rate: 5 Msym/sec
Modulation: 64 QAM
Receive Frequency Range: 65 - 750 MHz w/frequency selectable
Channel Plans: Standard, IRC, HRC
Input Impedance: 75 Ohms (nominally)
Minimum CNR (at receiver): 30 dB
Sensitivity: +5 to -15 dBmV
Group Delay Tolerance: 130 nS

Physical and Environmental
Dimensions: 2 1/2" x 6 5/8" x 9.6"
Weight: 2.8 lbs. (1.3 kgs)
Front Panel LEDs: Power, Test, Cable, PC
Rear Panel Connectors/Controls:
Cable Type F connector
Reset Button
EIA 232 25-pin port - reserved
RJ45 PC/hub connector
Power connection (DIN connector)
Universal Power Supply 100 to 250 VAC, 47 to 63 Hz

Operating Temperature: 0o C to +40o C (+32o F to +104o F)
Safety Specifications: UL 1950; CSA C22.2 No.950; IEC 950; EN 60950; AS/NZS 3260
Emissions: FCC Part 15, Class B; CISPR 22, Class B; EN 55022, Class B; AS/NZ 3548, Class B.
Immunity: EN 50082-1.

I
jayyy

Post by jayyy »

I can think of an easier way to resolve whether or not he's telling the truth, Kip -why don't you just have him email you the bloody sniff logs and try it yourself? Or keep tabs on a user here that tries it that you trust?
Kip Patterson

Post by Kip Patterson »

Those are the modem specs, for one of the models. There's a newer one, the Cybersurfr wave, which is 37 down 1.53 up.

There are alos manuals for the headend that explain how the caps are implemented, among other things.
The_Sandman

Post by The_Sandman »

Violent send me the logs as well.
DarkChylde19@hotmail.com
Violent

Post by Violent »

check this Kip :
http://www.midsouth.rr.com/rr_new/index.html

click on the "How does it work" link on the left. I thought they had done away with this page but they havent.

hmmm,,,notice near the top of the page:

"The modems are technically capable of throughput speeds of 8 to 27 Mb/s in the downstream path and the upstream path ranges from 1 - 3 Mb/s. "

Road runners own words - not my part of the Road Runner network,,,but this is how they sold it to me. Of course this is the only road runner page I could find with this type of information that is still up after this little fiasco. If ya find more let me know. The original (older type) of the Motorola cable modems were capable of this. I have one of these. The newer ones do not have this capability any more but are limited to 10Mb/s - period - so you were right about the 10 Mb/s but you assumed that I had the same modem everyone else did. I have an older modem, one of the first cybersufr cable modems, the older modems are the ones that are capable of greater then 10 Mb/s - and mine is. This information was also listed in print in the sales literature when the guy showed up at my door to sell me the service while he was canvasing the neighborhood. So doing a little math and using the maximum "technically capable" speeds mentioned on this page:

27 Mb/s = 2.7 Mb/s download (i'm getting 1.2 Mb/s after motorola codes)

3 Mb/s - 300 kb/s upload (but i'm getting 500 K - I dont know why -I just am after motorola codes)

Oh yeah I do not use a 10 Mb Nic like you assumed, I swapped it out for a 100 Mb 3 Com NIC.

So once again, I dont know how it works or why it works - it just does. I think I will spread the codes around a bit - maybe.

Oh well - I am thru with this subject.

BuhBye Image

Originally posted by Kip Patterson:
Those are the modem specs, for one of the models. There's a newer one, the Cybersurfr wave, which is 37 down 1.53 up.

There are alos manuals for the headend that explain how the caps are implemented, among other things.


[This message has been edited by Violent (edited 07-11-2000).]
NeoGuyver

Post by NeoGuyver »

Ooh, me too Image Can you send me the logs?
Mega_manx4@hotmail.com

Thank you VERY much Image
NeoGuyver

Post by NeoGuyver »

Ooh, me too Image Can you send me the logs?
Mega_manx4@hotmail.com

Thank you VERY much Image
NeoGuyver

Post by NeoGuyver »

What the Heck?! I didn't post that twice!
User avatar
Bouncer
Senior Member
Posts: 4834
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: OCONUS

Post by Bouncer »

I'm curious.

Is this download upload speed local to your cable company, or your throughput from other sites?

Functionally what you did was alter your modem to communicate using a wider data path to the headend equipment. Probably by resetting the modem to default factory settings. I sincerely suspect they will terminate your agreement in the not too distant future. By that I mean your altered device is now interacting with their equipment in a way they did not set it up to do. The possible damage this may cause to their equipment on their end could possibly fall back on you since you have deliberately altered your device to operate in a way different than the specifications they provided to it. You are of course, free to run your own cable, to your own headend and buy your own connections to other places.

In addition, if this throughput rate is from other sites, then you are DEFINATELY affecting devices beyond the headend in their system, and they will likely shut you down.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

------------------
"Yeah Baby, YEAH!!!"



[This message has been edited by Bouncer (edited 07-07-2000).]
Violent

Post by Violent »

Bouncer :
This is up and down speeds from the local cable company. I have on fast FTP sites enjoyed 900 k/s plus , with around 800 - 900 k/s being more of a norm for downloads and with averaging around 400 k/s upload on these sites. One site in particular that I get great speed on is ftp.amoco.com - i use this site for testing and routinely get 900 k/s plus down and 500k/s up from it (after the motorola codes)- but this is only with fast uncrowded sites. Of course you know that when you began to look at the net from outside your own domain or network there is too much stuff you need to go thru - slow servers - multiple routers and the like and of course this has an effect on what speeds you end up with - but alas those thinge we can not control.

Before the motorola codes the down speed wasn't all that bad but the up speed sucked. The biggest change here I guess I would have to say , with the codes,is the upload side.

"...altered your device to operate in a way different than the specifications they provided to it."

Well the specifications they sold me are outlined on one of their web pages (look up a few replies in this thread) and I am well within those specifications - and per the judge - legally as well.

You see in my state the cable company does not really decide what they want to do. We have a Public Service Commission which is very active. The cable company is considered a utility and is regulated by the Public Service Commission which will not allow them to remove service without cause , so they can not just disconnect you for no reason. They also are required by law to provide service on demand. So If the court says that i'm operating legally and the judge ordered them to turn it back on, then there is no cause , unless I do not pay the bill or something like that. Even if they do decide to terminate for some reason or other, I will just re-order it and have it re-installed because the law states that as a utility they must provide service on demand -in other words they can not refuse you service as long as you can pay for it.
User avatar
Philip
SG VIP
Posts: 11527
Joined: Sat May 08, 1999 5:00 am
Location: Jacksonville, Florida

Post by Philip »

Interesting... I'd like to look at those logs too. philip@speedguide.net
DIDS

Post by DIDS »

Hi Violent,

If possible can I get a copy of those logs?


Thanks,

DIDS



------------------

It Can't Rain All The Time
- Eric Draven (The Crow)

-------------------------
DIDS

Post by DIDS »

My e-mail is dids_m@hotmail.com
cableman
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 12:00 am

Post by cableman »

hi, i wanted to see those codes too =) my email is: sipsi@goplay.com
Lex Luthor

Post by Lex Luthor »

Violent,

You sure are a glutten for punishment, huh?

Out of curiousity, I went to ftp.amoco.com

Looks like they don't want anyone there! check this out! Yikes! Just from typing ftp.amoco.com, they are going to report me?

FTP root at ftp.amoco.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are connected to Amoco's ftp server
ftp.amoco.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

06/29/2000 12:55AM Directory 05-31-00 11:49AM -= Your IP Addresses have all been LOGGED and your ISPs will be contacted =-


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User avatar
Bouncer
Senior Member
Posts: 4834
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: OCONUS

Post by Bouncer »

Two things you may want to be aware of:

"...altered your device to operate in a way different than the specifications they provided to it."

"Well the specifications they sold me are outlined on one of their web pages (look up a few replies in this thread) and I am well within those specifications - and per the judge - legally as well."

I did look before I asked. It's specifies a 768kbps (96KBps) return path, but you're utilizing 4mbps (500KBps).

If you altered the amplitude settings at all then you definately altered the device in a way that it interacts with the cable headend. Period. No doubt about it. You are using more or a different frequencies then they assigned to your device, and you may (theoretically at least) damage the equipment at their end by doing so. I doubt it's in your service agreement that you're allowed to damage their equipment or interrupt their operations or service to other users.

"You see in my state the cable company does not really decide what they want to do. We have a Public Service Commission which is very active. The cable company is considered a utility and is regulated by the Public Service Commission which will not allow them to remove service without cause"

(rest snipped for brevity)

You better hold onto that, because no offense, the FCC is VERY likely to say it ISN'T a locally regulated utility. It's a nice argument, and I understand your point. You must also understand that at least TWO FEDERAL COURTS have already ruled that local jurisdictions have NO, ZERO, regulatory authority over cable in this regard.

Specifically, the argument applies to the open access mandates, but the point is still that communities cannot treat data access the way they treat cable TV. It is going to be handled more like a telecomm service. Which means local authorities cannot demand open access, but neither can they demand "service on demand", because they can't demand *anything* when it comes to data transmission (as opposed to One way TV transmission).

Be careful not to apply cable TV standards, to DATA access. They are two entirely different things in the eyes of the Federal Courts.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade, but that's definately the direction things are going in. One wonders what the courts reaction would be if you had open access, and your frequency altering for instance meant you were using upload frequencies sold or leased to OTHER ISPs and their customers. You see the point I'm sure.

To be fair, RR may let you get away with it because it might be easier not to bother. OTOH, they may fight you to the bitter end, because corporations do that too, especially if they think it's something a lot of people can start doing to alter the behaviour of equipment on their end and disrupt service to other users. You cannot not know by this point that your "alterations" are in fact taking more of the available spectrum and thus making the upload or return service unavailable for other folks who did, in fact, ALSO pay for a theoretical maximum which they can no longer EVER reach because of YOUR alterations to YOUR device. So you are now impacting the other users of the service in your area.

Their most likely course of action is to deny service because the modem is "damaged". That is, in their view, it is not operating within the specifications originally programmed into it by them. Therefore it is damaged, just as if it had been struck by come sort of EMI burst, and was using all new frequencies not programmed into it by them. They will of course restore service, but not to a damaged device.

Again, I think you're in for a longer fight for a couple of reasons. They will probably monitor all your usage for a month or two, and then cut you off, and say "See you in court".

Best of Luck,
-Bouncer-

------------------
"Yeah Baby, YEAH!!!"
ChromaZone

Post by ChromaZone »

Hey Violent!

Great arguments!

p.s. Think i can get a peak at those logs also, would be greatly appreciated?

snoopyluke@hotmail.com

Cheers
ChromaZone


[This message has been edited by ChromaZone (edited 07-07-2000).]
wee96

Post by wee96 »

wee96@hotmail.com

pass me the pill! heheh, no really I'd like to take a look as well (as everyone else has been wanting to). Sounds very interesting.
iBringPain

Post by iBringPain »

Violent, nice job standing up for your rights. I am suprised RR attempted to charge you with a felony (what was the dollar figure?) if I read your post correctly for theft of services. I am no legale begale but I would think it would have been a better move to go to civil court for a judgement of loss revenue from your home. I am not questioning anything you wrote I am just trying to understand it better. It is my understanding Most Motorola modems are uncapped up/down to begin with so I do not believe your system will cause any damage to RR system and I bet the tech guys don;t even care what speed you upload at, problably the only persons who care other than the whinners on this site are the attorneys who are billing RR at $400 a hour. Again nice victory....
Locked