T-Mobile Sued For Throttling ''Unlimited'' Data

[soo-nah-mee]

[citation][nom]Alvarez[/nom]...renders the two phones "essentially useless for anything other than making or receiving phone calls and text messages."[/citation]Anyone else chuckle when they read this? I know you're paying for much more than that, but it still makes me laugh: the phone can only be used as a phone???

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]renniz[/nom]Arrgghh. I hate when they do this. Comcast also has unlimited data, but not if you go over a certain amount of data. They say that it is in the contract and that only a small percentage go over this amount. Well, it isn't unlimited if it is limited.[/citation]
That pisses me off, if its only a 'small percentage' then it shouldn't be a big deal to allow those people to continue unabated.

 

[Mirth]

When did using your brain become optional? Do we really want some impersonal business to do our thinking for us? There are countless reports on how this or that company screwed some customer because of (or in spite of) the fine print yet people still ignore it.

Don't accept what someone tells you at face value. They don't have your best interests in mind. Only you do.

Bottom line: Buyer beware. Do your own research and check all claims, *then* sign on the dotted line.

 

[Trizomik]

I kind of agree about this false unlimited, but still I'be happy if I could get that much (10gb) for 49$.

The choice I have

 

[bourgeoisdude]

*sigh* here we go again...

It is *impossible* for *any* mobile phone company to continue to make the same profit margin with the current rate of increased bandwidth consumption per device. Carriers *have* to make changes.

Also, does anyone on this planet believe that suing T-mobile will make prices go down or bandwidth availability go up? This lawsuit is ridiculous, groundless, and it only hurts us, the consumers.

[citation][nom]gm0n3y[/nom]That pisses me off, if its only a 'small percentage' then it shouldn't be a big deal to allow those people to continue unabated.[/citation]

It's another "8% of the people use 80% of the service" thing (I don't recall the exact statistics but the rule still applies). To answer your point, yes, it's a huge deal.

 

[shanky887614]

he could have also filed a lawsuit for

the shop that sold it to him as having misold and intentonally misold it

10GB a month is nothing its only 10,240MB or 341MB a day or 2 videos streamed a day

 

[vpiscitelli]

"Unlimited" refers to the amount of data that can be downloaded and has no connection to how quickly that data can be downloaded. His plan is still unlimited; it's just considerably slower. Do they guarantee top download speeds 100% of the time? NO. Do they mention that speed can be throttled? YES. So what's the problem here?

 

[soo-nah-mee]

[citation][nom]Mirth[/nom]When did using your brain become optional? Do we really want some impersonal business to do our thinking for us? There are countless reports on how this or that company screwed some customer because of (or in spite of) the fine print yet people still ignore it.Don't accept what someone tells you at face value. They don't have your best interests in mind. Only you do.Bottom line: Buyer beware. Do your own research and check all claims, *then* sign on the dotted line.[/citation]Even if the buyer does read the fine print though, the actual amount of data transfer allowed before they throttle you is not disclosed. It's so ambiguous it could mean 5GB or 100GB. ...And if you are using the device as a wi-fi hotspot, someone who travels could rack up 10GB fairly easily.
I say if they are going to imposed this rule, they ought to tell you the exact amount you are allowed to use before being restricted, as well as enable you to easily keep track of how close you are to that limit.

 

[d_kuhn]

"Unlimited" is a pretty well defined word... if the advertiser says "Unlmited" then they shouldn't be able to limit it in the fine print. It seems to me that the guy has a case, I've seen cases in the past where huge bold marketing statements couldn't be contradicted by fine print.

 

[thrillhaus]

Although I don't agree with the throttling, how is throttling preventing unlimited data? He can still download.

 

[soo-nah-mee]

[citation][nom]thrillhaus[/nom]Although I don't agree with the throttling, how is throttling preventing unlimited data? He can still download.[/citation]But at a max of 50kbps. You can't do much at that speed. That could at least have a tiered system: maybe cut your speed in half at 10GB, then throttle it to 50kbps at 12GB. That way you would have a kind of "overage alarm" and limit your usage accordingly, yet still have somewhat decent service until the next billing cycle.

 

[eddieroolz]

Even if throttled it is technically still unlimited. Besides, he was able to use 10GB in a month, he should be happy he's not being charged an arm and a leg like with AT&T.

I say he has no case.

 

[borisof007]

Cmon man, 10gb in a month and he didn't think he'd get in trouble? This is a frivolous suit and will most likely be thrown out.

 

[Guest]

u all missing the point. his data is still unlimited... they limit his speed. it doesnt say unlimited data with unlimited speed!!!!

so technically he still can download whatever he wants... at a lower speed

 

[Poisoner]

I hope this guy, loses. What a waste of our courts.

 

[mlopinto2k1]

[citation][nom]groveborn[/nom]Completely unlimited (with some limitations)![/citation]LIFETIME LIMITED WARRANTY! Hah!

 

[Onus]

[citation][nom]Poisoner[/nom]I hope this guy, loses. What a waste of our courts.[/citation]
Actually, it isn't. No matter how it turns out, it will clarify terms used in cellular contracts. This is exactly the kind of thing that needs to be heard in court. What would a Reasonable Man expect?

 

[Twoboxer]

No case? Heh heh. Watch closely. The judge will at least demand release from the contract beginning with the date of throttling. Why? (Besides the obvious false advertising) Because T-mobile cannot prove that any other customer was harmed by this usage. They can only say they can't let everyone use 10GB/mo. Which means admitting their network is restricted, not unlimited.

Likely a trial judge will also demand adjustment to T-Mobile's presentation of its terms. But even if (s)he doesn't, publicity alone will make it necessary.

 

[jreagan]

Seems reasonable to me. When I see "unlimited", I read it as "you can download as much as we'll give you for one price." It certainly didn't say "download as much as YOU want to", quite the contrary given the wording in the contract.

 

[izzzy12k]

If you read into the advertisement in literal terms... he didn't get cut off or banned... so he can still download at any time, just at a slower rate. So the term "unlimited" still apply, just gotta be patient and wait for his data to download.

The adverstiement doesn't say unlimited download speed... either way, it's just wasting the tax payers money in the courts. *sigh*