Seems to me that they (Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum, Time Warner Cable and Comcast) are effectively operating a business out of your house and without a business license. I am sure that this is illegal in many towns and many towns would like the revenue.
In fact does this put the homeowner at risk since they are effectively supporting a business running out of their house? Tom On Dec 11, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Scott Helms <khe...@zcorum.com> wrote: > All of the members of the CableWiFi consortium have been. > > Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum, Time Warner Cable and > Comcast. > > http://www.cablewifi.com/ > > Liberty Global, the largest MSO, also does it and this year announced an > agreement with Comcast to allow roaming on each other's WiFi networks, > though that is not extended to the other members of CableWiFi at this time. > > http://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/news-feed/comcast-and-liberty-global-announce-agreement-to-connect-u-s-and-european-wi-fi-networks > > > Scott Helms > Vice President of Technology > ZCorum > (678) 507-5000 > -------------------------------- > http://twitter.com/kscotthelms > -------------------------------- > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Pavely <para...@nac.net> wrote: > >> http://bgr.com/2014/05/12/cablevision-optimum-modem-wifi-hotspots/ >> >> I thought cablevision has been doing this for years. >> >> I had a higher level tech at mi casa within the last two years and he >> suggested their goal was to get enough coverage to start offering CV voip >> cell phones. "pay a little less, for not guaranteed coverage' >> >> >> >> Ryan Pavely >> Net Access >> http://www.nac.net/ >> >> On 12/10/2014 9:35 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote: >> >>> Why am I not surprised? >>> >>> Whose fault would it be if your comcast installed public wifi would be >>> abused to download illegal material or launch a botnet, to name some random >>> fun one could have on your behalf. :-/ >>> >>> (apologies if this was posted already, couldn't find an email about it on >>> the list) >>> >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/disgruntled_ >>> customers_lob_sueball_at_comcast_over_public_wifi/ >>> >>> "A mother and daughter are suing Comcast claiming the cable giant's >>> router in their home was offering public Wi-Fi without their permission. >>> >>> Comcast-supplied routers broadcast an encrypted, private wireless network >>> for people at home, plus a non-encrypted network called XfinityWiFi that >>> can be used by nearby subscribers. So if you're passing by a fellow user's >>> home, you can lock onto their public Wi-Fi, log in using your Comcast >>> username and password, and use that home's bandwidth. >>> >>> However, Toyer Grear, 39, and daughter Joycelyn Harris – who live >>> together in Alameda County, California – say they never gave Comcast >>> permission to run a public network from their home cable connection. >>> >>> In a lawsuit [PDF] filed in the northern district of the golden state, >>> the pair accuse the ISP of breaking the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and >>> two other laws. >>> >>> Grear – a paralegal – and her daughter claim the Xfinity hotspot is an >>> unauthorized intrusion into their private home, places a "vast" burden on >>> electricity bills, opens them up to attacks by hackers, and "degrades" >>> their bandwidth. >>> >>> "Comcast does not, however, obtain the customer's authorization prior to >>> engaging in this use of the customer's equipment and internet service for >>> public, non-household use," the suit claims. >>> >>> "Indeed, without obtaining its customers' authorization for this >>> additional use of their equipment and resources, over which the customer >>> has no control, Comcast has externalized the costs of its national Wi-Fi >>> network onto its customers." >>> >>> The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages for themselves and on behalf >>> of all Comcast customers nation-wide in their class-action case – the >>> service was rolled out to 20 million customers this year." >>> >>> >>