AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T offers settlement to iPhone user who sued over 3G throttling
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AT&T offers settlement to iPhone user who sued over 3G throttling - Page 2

post #41 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

Don't be surprised once the new iPhone arrives in Oct if AT&T doesn't end unlimited contracts because it will be 4G LTE and not 3G anymore. I hope that prompts an exodus once and for all. The bastards!

The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eacumm View Post

They have the same rules, and they lie more then AT&T, that's why I dumped Verizon, and Sprint that like a abortion gone wrong.

That is exactly correct!
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

I'm surprised they haven't with thenewipad. Although for the case of the iPhone, until 5.1 my phone said 3G with HSPA+. More than a technicality. At&T can't have it both ways.

Word?
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!

Why would anyone stay if T breaks their unlimited contract? Masochism?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR View Post

FALSE. There is no evidence whatsoever of that.

I think the pigs to which he is referring are those top 5% of the user, I mean abusers, of the service. That's your evidence.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

I think the pigs to which he is referring are those top 5% of the user, I mean abusers, of the service. That's your evidence.

How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?

I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.

So here's a few facts that could help you out-

1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?

2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.

3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.

So yes- think and stew upon that for awhile.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 72
3/13/12 at 8:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

Word?
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.

I don't think Apple was legally bound and I don't have a clue what SJ's moves and thoughts would be or I'd be a CEO of the 2nd most valuable PC company in the world. I think Apple is laughing their collective ass off at being the most popular 4G phone. You can't buy that kind of marketing.

I like Sol's idea to post the actual speed or some factor of a base, 1x, 2x, 3x. . . 10x speed. But that wouldn't play into marketing plans of any company. How would that have played with Verizon advertising 3G coverage that was as fast and feature-ful as Edge? Look, AT&T got the shaft for a while when Verizon called their slow crap 3G. Turnabout is fair play. I'd like to believe if I was the product manager for the iPhone 4S on AT&T Wireless that I'd play it straight up. But then I'd be unemployed.

Sprint doesn't seem to need help with the shaft. They do it to solo.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR View Post

How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?

I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.

So here's a few facts that could help you out-

1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?

2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.

3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.

So yes- think and stew upon that for awhile.


They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

This guy was a data hog, pure and simple. Using 3G from his bed (Hello! WiFi anyone?) Anyway, AT&T is not to blame here. Lets face it, there is not enough bandwidth to go around and that means all carriers don't have enough. When continued investment by carriers and with more spectrum made available (I hope), things should improve within a few years. But don't whine and complain and support these data hogs who are causing these problems for moderate users.

You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.

A very basic principle of economics is that a good or service will sell in the marketplace for whatever the market will bear, regardless of the cost to produce. That means if a good or service sells for $1 in the market, it doesn't matter if it costs the provider $1.10 to deliver the service, or $0.10 to deliver it, it's only worth $1 in the market. What does that have to do with this? Well, data hogs are accused of making the service more expensive to provide, and they make you BELIEVE this is why they want to limit you. No, they want to limit you because there are now only 3 major carriers, with only 2 of them actually being competitive. So, they've become greedy. They can now limit you, and try and charge you more for actually using what they sold you in the first place. They are squeezing you.

You buddy on the bed using his 3G, if he had an unlimited contract, is using the very product sold to him. They sold him an "unlimited" data plan, so he's using it. Where's the crime? I don't see it...
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.

And this goes back to the very first thing I said to you- you need to take it upon yourself to learn what bandwidth actually is and how it really exists and how it is used.

There are many options available to them on their part to relieve traffic in densely populated areas at peak time.

And they don't owe me shit- you are right. but that's why they will lose in court every single time.

Dude- aren't you personally feeling shame that you are bought and sold to a companies manipulation of your naive understanding of the situation? The fact they have your mind front and center manipulated to their end with zero evidence?
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.

So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:19pm
This IS the real problem. Their too greedy to expand the bandwidth. As why they offered unlimited in the first place. It's because they wanted to suck people like me dry while justifying why I should pay their extortive monthly prices in the first place. They knew they over-booked the seating at the show (Animal Farm playing).




They are all expanding their (note proper usage) networks and if we want speed, we will pay for it. It's a privilege. So ask your mom for some bucks and send it in.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post

So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...





How did they know this in 2007? It is not sustainable for any company today, but I don't think carriers knew this almost 5 years ago. Companies can change plans based on needs, resources, etc. I would love unlimited to stick around, but with WiFi and hotspots, I don't see that it's needed any longer. And I don't think it's wrong to ask me to pay for what I use. I might actually save money, whereas the data hogs will pay more to feed at the trough.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:33pm
Quote:
You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.



Where is this magical technology that produces bandwidth out of the blue? How do you know they aren't working to develop ways to improve efficiency? Both AT&T and Verizon changed the terms and Sprint will soon do the same. Unlimited is unsustainable because it costs money to fill the trough to feed the piggies!!!!!
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 72
3/13/12 at 9:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

If I'm paying for each GB of data then I shouldn't be throttled.

You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms

That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 72
3/13/12 at 10:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by eacumm View Post

Tell that to the man who just successfully sued AT&T and won for them throttling him. now are you a lawyer if not shut the f*ck up dude.

If you are talking about Mr Spaccarelli he didn't really win because of speed and whether it was in the contract etc. He won based on the issue that the tier plans aren't throttled and he wasn't getting as much unthrottled use as another party paying the same data plan as he was. If you are playing the same amount, the argument goes, you should be getting the same service. It's fair and right and the court judged it that way.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 72
3/13/12 at 10:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

It was implied that I was buying a 3G service. To me that means 3G speeds. If you purchased a house, wouldn't you consider the mortgage contract void if they later came and tore it down and put up a shed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

They didn't throttle it to below 3G speeds.

What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 72
3/13/12 at 10:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms

That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.

Actually I didn't sign anything. If I'm paying by the gig it will be for 4g/lte speeds. I'm not on an unlimited plan. I'm certainly willing to go to court as many times as I have to. Advertise 4g/lte and that's what I should get.

AT&T spends more money on advertising than other carriers when that money would've been better spent on getting their network up to snuff. Word of mouth is stronger than advertising.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 72
3/13/12 at 10:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?

So yes it is below ATTs 3G speeds....because that's what you are paying for. Sprint users are paying only 70 bucks a month because their network is the shittiest when it comes to data.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 72
3/13/12 at 11:19pm
If after the 5.1 update I am now considered 4G for whatever marketing purposes or whatever, shouldn't I now be allowed 5 GB before they cut me down? I'm not sure how they can get away by calling it 4G yet they are still throttling my account at 3 GB
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 72
3/14/12 at 4:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

If I'm paying for each GB of data then I shouldn't be throttled.

Then you're in luck. People on tiered data plans (eg. paying for each GB) are not subject to any of AT&T's current or announced throttling policies.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 72
3/14/12 at 4:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizardflaco View Post

If after the 5.1 update I am now considered 4G for whatever marketing purposes or whatever, shouldn't I now be allowed 5 GB before they cut me down? I'm not sure how they can get away by calling it 4G yet they are still throttling my account at 3 GB

Because "4G" is just a marketing term which doesn't really mean anything at all, as you have already noted. They're setting throttling limits based upon the underlying technology, and any HSPA+ based "4G" service is still fundamentally based upon the same underlying technology as regular, run-of-the-mill 3G.

LTE is the real breakaway point where the underlying technologies fundamentally change. Unfortunately, cellular carriers were too impatient for some new catchphrase to fool customers into thinking there was something new on offer, so they decided they couldn't wait for LTE roll-out to begin in earnest before they started advertising so-called "4G" service. So they took a technology which was essentially already in place, gave it some new lipstick by applying the latest revision of the existing technology, and re-branded it.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 72
3/14/12 at 6:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJJameson View Post

So then the fault is AT&T's. Don't sell fraudulent "unlimited" plans and then whine when users actually use it. Especially when they are doing the things your ad claims they can do. Poor AT&T whatever will they do with themselves. As brought up before if they are so hard up for spectrum how were they able to give some away to TMobile? Why would they have even made that part of the deal if they didn't have it to spare?

Exactly! Everyone should know that a multi billion dollar companies like the telecoms do enormous planning around what they offer to their customers. When they offered unlimited data plans they KNEW what could happen with their network. Don't for a moment that they would offer that to customers with KNOWING what the consequences were to their network. They probably had the possibility of throttling in their plans the whole time. They offered unlimited data plans already knowing they would reduce throughput on high data users. It was probably part of the cost analysis and planning when they were thinking of offering unlimited data plans.

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply

Tallest Skil:


"Eventually Google will have their Afghanistan with Oracle and collapse"

"The future is Apple, Google, and a third company that hasn't yet been created."


 


 

Reply
post #64 of 72
3/14/12 at 6:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?

That doesn't contradict what I said. ATT simply didn't cut speeds to below 3G speeds. The speeds that users were getting after being throttled are still considered 3G, and are above the speed of 2G technologies. This is not a confusing claim, I don't see why you're confused.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 72
3/14/12 at 7:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Actually I didn't sign anything. If I'm paying by the gig it will be for 4g/lte speeds. I'm not on an unlimited plan. I'm certainly willing to go to court as many times as I have to. Advertise 4g/lte and that's what I should get.

AT&T spends more money on advertising than other carriers when that money would've been better spent on getting their network up to snuff. Word of mouth is stronger than advertising.

If you didn't sign anything, then you don't have a valid contract & you can't hold AT&T to their end of the 'deal'. At some point, you agreed to a contract, whether by actually signing some piece of paper, or taking over someone else's contract or whatever. I don't necessarily think that throttling is bad, I do think that the way AT&T did it was the worst possible way & resulted in a lot of negative publicity for them. Part of me wonders if that was't intentional. The only people who get pissed & leave (for the most part) are those on unlimited plans, so for AT&T, it's probably exactly what they wanted. I still think it's crappy & they should have throttled at a minimum, no lower than 3 gigs per month, proabably higher.

For everyone ranting that AT&T owes them money, or they broke their contract, etc. They didn't. What they did was slimy, no argument, but it was not illegal according to the contracts they have in place. There's a big difference between unethical & illegal. For those that think they are going to get a huge payout from AT&T, keep dreaming. If you get anything at all, it will be a small amount (under $50 for sure) in either cash back or some kind of credit to buy accessories or something. The lawayers will get a huge payday for trying this & AT&T will settle, without admitting guilt, just to make this all go away.

The loss in court was a small claims court and AT&T didn't even send a corporate lawyer, they sent a sales manager. They won't make that mistake again.

I'm not an AT&T fan by any means, I use sprint becuase that's what works at my house/work, but when we say that AT&T is the devil, let's remember that AT&T was the only company willing to bring the iPhone to market. Apple tried to strike a deal with Verizon first & Verizon wouldn't do it. We do have AT&T to thank (partially) for bringing the iPhone to fruition.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 72
3/14/12 at 7:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizardflaco View Post

If after the 5.1 update I am now considered 4G for whatever marketing purposes or whatever, shouldn't I now be allowed 5 GB before they cut me down? I'm not sure how they can get away by calling it 4G yet they are still throttling my account at 3 GB



Wait until next month and check on this. If you're being throttled at under 5GB, it's new lawsuit time, and you need to remain watchful for future information on that front.

Thanks for recounting your experience, but for normalcy's sake, you'll probably have to wait until you're on 4G for a full month before bringing this up with a court.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #67 of 72
3/14/12 at 8:11am
I have unlimited plans on both my iPhone and iPad (probably going to give up the iPhone plan as I stopped using massive bandwidth once my iPad came along).

Some months I use next to nothing (near wifi a lot), some months I use 3-5 GB (rare, that high, but probably 3-4 months out of the year I use >2GB).

I'd be perfectly happy if they sold me data by the byte rather than by the month. Or, at the very least, gave me 'roll-over' bytes. I don't have a problem paying $30 for 3GB (or $20 for 2GB) every time I use that much data. In the long run, it would be cheaper than by the month for me. Just give me full speed for every byte I've purchased and don't limit how long I have to use those bytes. That's the fair way to do it.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 72
3/14/12 at 9:44am
Both are in the wrong here. AT&T is wrong for throttling his service. But he is wrong in going against their rules of service by tethering other devices to his I-phone. He knows it's wrong but admits to still doing it. And it's a few people like this that do ruin it for other users that do NOT tether other devices to their smartphones.

As for them being able to void his contract. Yes they can. He's already admitted to violating the rules of his contract. It's as simple as that. He won his settlement. He needs to be happy with that. If he moves to Verizon & does the same; it's gonna happen to him again.\
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 72
3/14/12 at 12:17pm
Spaccarelli you da man. You are the key to unlock this sheister behavior of ATT.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 72
3/14/12 at 2:29pm
$850. Wow. That's what? The average plutocrat's weekly manicure budget for his/her left thumb?

This struck me as a very reasonable price for the definition of "unlimited," and so I was inspired to purchase the definition of "two years" on eBay for $1.37. (Can you imagine? No one else bid.)

Once I'd closed the deal, I called AT&T and told them I was tearing up my contract because I'd rather suck the snot from a dead neocon's nose until his rotten head collapses than do business with them one more day. I was informed that as I'd signed a two-year contract 10 months ago, they'd be billing me for 14 months.

I chuckled politely and replied, "Au contraire, my quaint amigo. Since yesterday, when I completed my (if I do so say myself) brilliant eBay coup, the definition of 'two years' is '10 months,' and therefore my contract has expired."

I don't blame the indentured servant to whom I was speaking for his ignorance. After all, I purchased only the English definition of "two years," and that no doubt will take some while to percolate down to whichever benighted hellhole AT&T is this month externalizing its labor costs.

Yesterday I bought "'Til death do us part." Tonight I plan to open a bottle of Bolly and inform my husband that the new definition is "Until you weigh five pounds more than you did the day I married you." (What? Faithless? Don't be ridiculous It's his birthday and I'm giving him a gym membership.)

God bless America, land of opportunity.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 72
3/14/12 at 3:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjgchicago View Post

The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!

No iPhone has LTE. Are iPhones "horribly slow"?

Why have people flocked to the iPhone? Certainly NOT "because they want speed".

Think of the implications of yor statements, and reexamine your premises please.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 72
3/14/12 at 11:38pm
All you non-unlimited, non-grandfathered, AT&T subscribers who blame people like me for "hogging bandwidth" and "expecting a free ride" can SUCK IT!!! I pay AT&T for a unlimited data allowance at 3G speeds, and I legally expect them to provide that service! This lawsuit is legal proof that they are legally liable for this service. Should I be throttled, I will immediately sue also. A legal precedence has now been set.

Do you think AT&T would allow me to only pay a portion of my payment because I got only a portion of this service? NO! They would cut my service off and charge me whopping $250 for violating my contract. AT&T is going to price themselves out of the market and their customers will leave them for another carrier.

If this issue can NOT affect you, your opinion is completely irrelevant!! I don't care if you don't like my opinion...I have a grandfathered plan with AT&T so my opinion DOES matter.
Don't flame me for my own opinion, unless you feel it necessary to boost your own ego.
Reply
Don't flame me for my own opinion, unless you feel it necessary to boost your own ego.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T offers settlement to iPhone user who sued over 3G throttling