So is it in the best interest of the consumer to not fine businesses? I'm not, per se, being sarcastic this time. I mean, if fines just ultimately punish the consumer, instead of the business. What is the point of them.
No, that would be you using a strawman argument. I said nothing of the kind.
Ok... So help me out here then. What is the sham argument here? It seems that AT&T (and like you mentioned, many other businesses) get to get away with bad behavior because our daily lives depend on their service. Straw man, as it may be, why does AT&T get to pass on the costs of its mistakes to future or new customers. When if I make a mistake in my life, or if I intentionally behave bad, like park in a handicap parking space I can't pass that cost on.
Is that just a perk that businesses get? Surely, you don't disagree that a business shouldn't get away with illegal or terrible behavior.
Ok... So help me out here then. What is the sham argument here? It seems that AT&T (and like you mentioned, many other businesses) get to get away with bad behavior because our daily lives depend on their service. Straw man, as it may be, why does AT&T get to pass on the costs of its mistakes to future or new customers. When if I make a mistake in my life, or if I intentionally behave bad, like park in a handicap parking space I can't pass that cost on.
Is that just a perk that businesses get? Surely, you don't disagree that a business shouldn't get away with illegal or terrible behavior.
First, I don't think you understand what a strawman tactic is. Put simply, it is advancing a deliberately false argument in order to knock it down in front of other people. "SDW says XYZ, and here's why XYZ is stupid!" That's what you tried to do there.
Secondly, I think you misunderstood my point. AT&T and other businesses don't get away with "bad behavior" because we need their services so badly. They "get away" with passing on costs (all costs, including business expenses, taxes, fines, etc.) because that's simply the nature of how businesses operate. You asking why these companies are "allowed" to do this is like asking why gravity is allowed to function. It's a law of nature. Businesses pass on costs. You can fine them all you want, but you need to realize that in the end, the vast majority of costs WILL be passed on.
I am not personally saying this means we shouldn't fine or regulate businesses. I'm saying it's worthy to note this law of nature (so to speak) when thinking about policy. I've wondered for many years why liberals and progressives refuse to acknowledge this basic principle. They honestly think they can force business to do things. Then, when business does what business does, which is resist )and attempt to remain as profitable as possible), liberals go apoplectic, waging war on these soulless corporations.
The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday announced its intent to levy a $100 million fine against AT&T after finding that the wireless carrier mislead customers about its throttling of data plans that were advertised as being unlimited.
"Consumers deserve to get what they pay for," FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said. "Broadband providers must be upfront and transparent about the services they provide. The FCC will not stand idly by while consumers are deceived by misleading marketing materials and insufficient disclosure."
The FCC found that AT&T did not adequately inform customers of the potential for throttling, violating the 2010 Open Internet Transparency Rule. The rule "mandates that broadband access providers disclose accurate information sufficient to enable consumers to make informed choices regarding their use of broadband Internet services and to ensure they are not misled or surprised by the quality or cost of the services they actually receive."
For its part, AT&T vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
"We will vigorously dispute the FCC's assertions," the company said in a statement. "The FCC has specifically identified this practice as a legitimate and reasonable way to manage network resources for the benefit of all customers, and has known for years that all of the major carriers use it. We have been fully transparent with our customers, providing notice in multiple ways and going well beyond the FCC's disclosure requirements."
AT&T has faced a double-barreled assault from the government over this issue, with both the FCC and Federal Trade Commission ramping up investigations. The FTC <a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/10/28/ftc-files-suit-against-att-for-deceptive-unfair-data-throttling">filed suit</a> against AT&T last October, alleging that the carrier's practice of selling plans with ostensibly unlimited mobile data and then throttling download speeds amounted to unfair and deceptive practices. AT&T's throttling was categorized as "severe," with as many as 3.5 million customers facing speed reductions of up to 90 percent of the advertised speeds.
The disposition of the FTC's lawsuit is unclear following the FCC's action.
Throttling after a set amount of data has been used, a threshold that is crossed, a limit on the amount of full-speed data... is less than unlimited.
Literally all data is less than unlimited, then, since all speeds aren’t infinite. An unlimited amount of data has nothing to do with the speed at which it’s accessed. You can still use as much data as you desire at the lower speed.
Originally Posted by SDW2001
If I can't reasonably use my "unlimited" plan beyond 5Gb a month, it's not unlimited in reality.
I guess it falls to the legal definition of ‘reasonable’, then, as so many things do.
Comments
I think you answered your own question.
Man, I really need to start my own business. I could pass my DVD late fees, AT&T overage fees, bail costs for my son, on to my customers.
No, that would be you using a strawman argument. I said nothing of the kind.
Is that just a perk that businesses get? Surely, you don't disagree that a business shouldn't get away with illegal or terrible behavior.
First, I don't think you understand what a strawman tactic is. Put simply, it is advancing a deliberately false argument in order to knock it down in front of other people. "SDW says XYZ, and here's why XYZ is stupid!" That's what you tried to do there.
Secondly, I think you misunderstood my point. AT&T and other businesses don't get away with "bad behavior" because we need their services so badly. They "get away" with passing on costs (all costs, including business expenses, taxes, fines, etc.) because that's simply the nature of how businesses operate. You asking why these companies are "allowed" to do this is like asking why gravity is allowed to function. It's a law of nature. Businesses pass on costs. You can fine them all you want, but you need to realize that in the end, the vast majority of costs WILL be passed on.
I am not personally saying this means we shouldn't fine or regulate businesses. I'm saying it's worthy to note this law of nature (so to speak) when thinking about policy. I've wondered for many years why liberals and progressives refuse to acknowledge this basic principle. They honestly think they can force business to do things. Then, when business does what business does, which is resist )and attempt to remain as profitable as possible), liberals go apoplectic, waging war on these soulless corporations.
Literally all data is less than unlimited, then, since all speeds aren’t infinite. An unlimited amount of data has nothing to do with the speed at which it’s accessed. You can still use as much data as you desire at the lower speed.
If I can't reasonably use my "unlimited" plan beyond 5Gb a month, it's not unlimited in reality.
I guess it falls to the legal definition of ‘reasonable’, then, as so many things do.