ISP sued for throttling data

[Kevin Lancaster]

ISP sued for throttling data

The U.S. government sued AT&T Inc on Tuesday, alleging the No. 2 U.S. wireless carrier sold consumers unlimited data plans but would reduce their Internet speeds once they exceeded a certain amount of data

 

[CuppaJoe]

So now they have the same issue that we have with the word 'uncapped', only in their case the government is the plaintiff.

Wonder if they will also be allowed to call it that as long as access is only throttled, but not cut off completely for high volume users.

Our ISPs got away with it rather easily, which makes me wonder what happened behind the scenes between ICASA and the ISPA when it first came up.

Following this logic, you can also call someone a Millionaire if he has a million cents.

 

[bwana]

You'll be surprised at the number of people that will actually try to justify this soft capping simply because it's an "industry standard". That's right - the industry says it's ok so it's ok.

Good on the FTC for taking the US ISPs to task.

 

[ambo]

I think what this shows us is that 'uncapped' data is typically only relevant in a specific context and for a limited period. As the market shifts (which it does very quickly these days in telecoms) the models quickly become infeasible.

Uncapped services at 3G speeds when people are only doing email and web browsing have very different input costs from unlimited Netflix over LTE!

ISPs in the consumer space keep getting burnt by uncapped offerings yet many customers are also not interested in cap watching.

 

[hellfire]

I think what this shows us is that 'uncapped' data is typically only relevant in a specific context and for a limited period. As the market shifts (which it does very quickly these days in telecoms) the models quickly become infeasible.

Uncapped services at 3G speeds when people are only doing email and web browsing have very different input costs from unlimited Netflix over LTE!

ISPs in the consumer space keep getting burnt by uncapped offerings yet many customers are also not interested in cap watching.

But why should we (consumers) be interested in cap watching.
If I were "interested in cap watching" then I'd have a (cheaper) capped account.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

...beats the whole point of having an uncapped account.

I can understand it if they want to shape/throttle heavy users so as to prevent network congestion, but some ISP's really go overboard with shaping/throttling...

 

[TheMightyQuin]

ISP sued for throttling data

The U.S. government sued AT&T Inc on Tuesday, alleging the No. 2 U.S. wireless carrier sold consumers unlimited data plans but would reduce their Internet speeds once they exceeded a certain amount of data

Everybody interested in this issue, which is fast becoming a huge debate in the US, should watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU

 

[entrepr]

It's really great the US Govt is pursuing this - should sharpen the debate and inform the rights of consumers in SA

 

[kianm]

They should try that here, I'm sure very few , if any, ISPs will survive that

 

[Rickster]

Uncapped ≠ Unthrottled.

 

[falcon786]

I think many of you are forgetting the main point here,they changed the terms of the deal after people had signed up for it,if you are told an "uncapped package" comes with a certain usage threshold after which its throttled then well and good but if it was initially completely uncapped and then they imposed low usage thresholds once you are locked into the deal already then people will have a problem.

The changing of the terms seems to be the main focus point in this case,have any of our ISP's done the same that we are comparing?