FBI Now Investigating The Comcast Porn Bowl

Comcast says their investigation shows that their systems were functioning properly, so they’ve turned the case over to the FBI.

“We have shared all of our information on this situation with the FBI and will continue to provide our full cooperation to them throughout their investigation,” spokeswoman Kelle Maslyn said in a statement e-mailed to the Arizona Daily Star.

Wow, a real whodunit.

Comcast asking the FBI to solve its porn interruption [AZ Star]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Flame says:

    The Butler did it

  2. jchabotte says:

    It was the Doctor Who “Max Headroom” Hacker, i tells ya!

    • floraposte says:

      @jchabotte: Hey! I actually saw that live! It was kind of creepy at the time. Ah, memories.

      • mzs says:

        @floraposte: I saw maybe 30 seconds on WGN. There was only a buzzing sound and a guy in a Max Headroom mask. I was pretty young at the time and it really scared me. By the time I got my mother the news was back. She did not believe me until a few days later when it was a story on Nightline or some other late night news show. As a kid it very much bothered me that my parent did not believe me and it was just plain scary.

  3. Yankees368 says:

    Time Warner did it

  4. Roy Hobbs says:

    …And find out WHO HACKED INTO MY SYSTEM!

    /Ocean’s 11’d

  5. Corporate_guy says:

    They call in the FBI because an employee screwed up trying to watch porn and check the game?

  6. Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ゜-゜ノ) says:

    Excellent use of FBI resources.

    Also, I’ve heard a cat is stuck in a tree. GO GET ‘EM, MEN!

  7. snowburnt says:

    FBI = new big brother?

  8. Trai_Dep says:

    Great to know that all those white-collar, million-dollar criminals are safely locked away for decades and their assets returned. And that Terror, Inc has sent out a press release announcing they’re giving up on attacking the US.
    Wait – boobies! What was I saying?

  9. headhot says:

    Good luck with that investigation. What are they going to do, dust for prints? I could have been a dozen people at dozens of points in the network, all with a reason the be there, and no logging on the video systems to look at.

  10. Davan says:

    as mentioned in the previous discussion of this topic – its just a dick people! unclench!

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      @Davan: Oh sure, unclench. I know where that THING goes after that lowering of the guard. Do not want!

    • Skeetz says:

      @Davan: They should consider themselves lucky it wasn’t a Max Hardcore clip.. now THAT would be epic.. the clip from the superbowl was like a high school kid discovering it’s hillarious when you swing your manhood and make slapping sounds.. it was more like farting infront of your friends and laughing than offensive.. kind of a let down really.

    • Twinrevanoe says:

      @Davan: This is a lot of people we’re talking about. This aint the people who go: “Oh, it’s a porn movie. How joyful.” these are the people who will freak the fuck out when they see this: “OH MY GOD, ITS A PENIS! CALL THE COPS, THE FCC, THE MAYOR, JUST GO!”

      People freaked out over Janet Jackson’s nipple, guess they can also freak out about seeing a wangly manhood.

      But this ranks on the lines of shock of “Find Your Son/Daughter Looking At Porn”. if it was in the middle of “something”, or if it was nationwide, THEN it would be more shocking.

  11. ThickSkinned says:

    I love how the article says “viewers…were subjected to a 30-second clip from a pay-per-view porn channel.” Like the clip held them down and went all medieval on their ass. Is the sight of a male member really that damaging to people in Tucson?

    • billy says:

      @ThickSkinned: That’s not why Comcast asked the FBI to help. Comcast can’t figure out why it happened and they’ve asked the FBI to find out if somebody did it maliciously.

    • Barry White Stripes, Office LW says:

      @ThickSkinned: The people of Tucson actually are that “innocent” and surely scarred by the dude waving his wang around. I’m sure the moral majority population there are still making phone calls about this, and before you know it, Border Patrol, DHS, Sheriff Joe (yes, wrong county…making a point here!), and the Men in Black will decent on Tucson to solve this evil deed.

      /Grew up in Tucson

  12. Rhayader says:

    Uhh, why the FBI? Wouldn’t this more accurately fall under the purview of the FCC?

    We already have enough federal oversight of our communications.

    • billy says:

      @Rhayader: Comcast can’t figure out why it happened and they’ve asked the FBI to find out if somebody did it maliciously. It doesn’t have to do with the content of the programming. It has to do with a possible investigation of outside tampering.

      • Rhayader says:

        @rubinow: Yeah, but outside tampering with a broadcast signal, right? It’s about the unaccounted broadcast of something. Sound like it’s right up the FCC’s ally to me.

        • billy says:

          @Rhayader: Hijacking someone’s broadcast signal is a federal crime. FBI.

          • Rhayader says:

            @rubinow: The FCC is a federal institution too, no? They investigate federal violations that fall within their scope? Still failing to see the distinction.

            • billy says:

              @Rhayader: Of course the FCC is a federal institution, but it doesn’t inspect crimes. The FBI does that. The FCC is more of a regulatory commission.

              If you look at the FCC website, the Commission is divided up into different bureaus. I have yet to find anywhere on that website where the FCC has authority or interest in investigating this type of crime. The FCC has an enforcement bureau, but, again, I can’t find anything that even comes close to what was described by Comcast. If you can find it, great! I might have missed it.

              But in any event, even if the FCC DID have the power to investigate or regulate this type of incident, it would not preclude the FBI from conducting its own criminal investigation. The FCC can’t prosecute criminally. Criminal actions fall under the purview of the FBI. It looks like they want to know more about what happened in anticipation of filing a criminal complaint. It’s their job.

              Wikipedia has an article entitled “Broadcast Signal Intrusion” which talks about similar incidents. It has a few lines about FCC regulations regarding signal intrusions, but curiously, there are no links to back it up. The FCC website turns up nothing when you search for “broadcast signal intrusion” or even “signal intrusion.” “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_signal_intrusion

              • billy says:

                @rubinow: The FCC’s interest might come under 301 of the Communications Act which says you need a license to broadcast. But it still doesn’t preclude the FBI from conducting its own investigation and bringing charges or conducting its investigation and giving that info to the FCC.

                If it turns out that the perpetrator did not have a license, I’m not sure what the FCC would or could do about it anyway.

      • LastAndLeast says:

        @rubinow: Ya know, if someone did it intentionally, I bet it would’ve lasted a whole lot longer than 30 inches…er…seconds.

        • dragonfire81 says:

          @LastAndLeast: The FCC would get involved if say, 300 people filed complaints with them because they were upset they got flashed with a penis during the Super Bowl.

          That’s not what this is though. Comcast is trying to find out if someone did it on purpose and possible committed a crime. For that, you go to the FBI.

        • billy says:

          @LastAndLeast: I guess that’s what they’re all trying to find out.

    • Pixelantes Anonymous says:

      @Rhayader: Didn’t you know that in the New Conservative United States of America porn is a crime.

  13. Xerloq says:

    I got this story over twitter, and expected something entirely different:
    Here’s my screenshot: [farm4.static.flickr.com]
    “Comcast says their systems were fun?!?”

  14. Chongo says:

    Meanwhile, all other crimes have been solved.

  15. midwestkel says:

    Wouldn’t this be an issue for the FCC? If not, why?

    • MercyEleusis says:

      @midwestkel: As mentioned a dozen times before, this does not have to do with the subject that was seen, but rather HOW it happened, because Comcast is claiming it wasn’t a technical problem, meaning that someone else did it, which would then be a federal crime.

    • corsec67 says:

      @midwestkel: Because this is Cable, not broadcast. The issue didn’t involve normal broadcast TV, so no FCC jurisdiction.

      I personally hate that the FCC is the censor for the airwaves.

      In this case Comcast wants to see if it was done maliciously.

      • Rhayader says:

        @corsec67: From wikipedia: The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 as the successor to the Federal Radio Commission and is charged with regulating all non-federal government use of the radio spectrum (including radio and television broadcasting), and all interstate telecommunications (wire, satellite and cable) as well as all international communications that originate or terminate in the United States.

        @MercyEleusis: That is not an answer. Isn’t the FCC in charge of methods of communication as much as they are in the content? Isn’t this ultimately a question of the method by which this was broadcast? Sounds like a perfect fit to me.

        • ViperBorg says:

          @Rhayader: Not if the signal was hacked from the outside to display that. Then no one under FCC rule was at fault, because a broadcaster themselves didn’t do it, and thus a criminal action. FCC has no Law Enforcement authority, FBI does.

  16. Chris Stone says:

    Someone at Comcast turned a silly little case over to the FBI? Gah, what a dick!

  17. Twinrevanoe says:

    Am I horrible for thinking that the FBI is only there to watch it?

    “Ok, rewind”

    “There.”

    “Ahh yeah, that’s great.”

    “What are we looking for, sir?”

    “Ahh…well…uhm…”

  18. MorvenCachondo says:

    If they had let it run for 5 or 6 seconds before catching it, that would be one thing, but to let it run for 30 seconds? Who was asleep at the switch?

    • scoosdad says:

      @MorvenCachondo:

      Who was asleep at the switch?

      Uhh, maybe the guy who was also responsible for the porn sneaking in?

      “We have shared all of our information on this situation with the FBI and will continue to provide our full cooperation to them throughout their investigation,” spokeswoman Kelle Maslyn said in a statement e-mailed to the Arizona Daily Star.

      My own theory is that this announcement by Comcast is just their way of scaring the bejeezus into one or more of their employees and causing them to confess before the FBI really gets involved. Nowhere does it actually say that the FBI agreed to take on the case.

    • gamerecks says:

      @MorvenCachondo: The person probably wasnt asleep, they just didnt have any free hands to fix it.

  19. shorty63136 says:

    Please use my tax dollars for something important and relevant, please.

  20. axiomatic says:

    Honestly, who cares?

    STFU and GBTW on DOCSIS 3.0 roll out please Comcast.

  21. backbroken says:

    Phew. I am relieved that this issue is being handled by the FBI. After all, we now know that the financial collapse had its roots in the Janet Jackson Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction.

  22. Oakie Pokie says:

    FBI investigating the porno blunder? are you effing serious?

    where the hell are we? cuba? check it out folks… communism won! you heard it here first!

  23. faust1200 says:

    The U.S.- Severed head – OK / Giving head – Not OK

  24. adamczar says:

    What the fuck is this?

  25. jmndos says:

    I’m pretty sure it was sabotage, a hilarious one at that.

    American Football is definitely primitive bible thumping “Redneck Shit” as mentioned in a previous article. What better to see the reaction of these bible thumpers to hard core porn. Hell, if I were a comcast engineer, especially in a state where there are maybe 100 high school graduates for the whole state, I would do it to.

  26. Yoko Broke Up The Beatles says:

    Who is the FCC going to fine on this?

    • scoosdad says:

      @Yoko Broke Up The Beatles: It was cable, not over the air. The FCC won’t fine anyone for porn on cable. Even though it was an over the air station affected, the porn appeared only on the local cable system’s feed of the station.

  27. Borax-Johnson says:

    Dust for prints? More like get a DNA sample.

  28. SacraBos says:

    I’m surprised Comcast didn’t charge them for it. Isn’t Spice and Playboy an extra cost subscription?

  29. DustoMan says:

    So… FBI has nothing else to do huh?

  30. ceez says:

    sure lets stop looking for terrorists and such so we can figure out who put a 30 second porn clip on our tv’s?!?! really? america? are we this sensitive? how about: “We dunno whodunit, sorry, now enjoy your 300 channels of comcasticity fun”!

    • erin_w (formerly femme_dork) says:

      @ceez: Except anyone who isn’t as free-thinking as you (or many other people on this thread, myself included) is going to get up in arms about it. It’s still immediate, and I would guess they think that the FBI’s time and resources are limitless. People working around the clock, yadda yadda yadda.

    • billy says:

      @ceez: Who said anybody was stopping the search for terrorists?

  31. PittDragon says:

    I wonder what would have happened if the game was interrupted with 2 Girls, 1 Cup instead of regular porn.

  32. Skater009 says:

    Right , well if they would move the tech from india , maybe they could find out what happened.

  33. Skater009 says:

    FBI – Female body inspectors HEHE

  34. taylorb says:

    I would say this is legit. If Comcast transmissions were interrupted and they don’t know who did it, they need to figure out who did it and how to stop it. Sure, porn was (relatively) harmless, but if their security hole isn’t patched up, who knows what else could be broadcast without Comcast knowing.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Here is something to think about .If this is not investigated ,who can positively say that all our banking , SS#, passwords,or anything else we hold so dear to our privacy will not be compromised . I think that we should let them investigate anybody they want .But , they also need to investigate themselves or every other governmental institution.

  36. rose0red says:

    It was Tyler Durden.

  37. Justifan says:

    it was rather wholesome as porn goes.

  38. loueloui says:

    Hmm. I see they are offering $10 to anyone who was exposed to pornography. I wounder if this is cumulative. At that I could easily retire.

  39. gman863 says:

    Maybe it was Comcast’s attempt to satisfy the FCC’s “equal time” doctrine years after Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction.