
FTC Says AT&T Has Misled Millions of Consumers with ‘Unlimited’ Data Promises - tshtf
http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/10/ftc-says-att-has-misled-millions-consumers-unlimited-data
======
swartkrans
For those of us who are Americans, isn't it amazing how the companies that
provide us with access to the internet are pretty much among the most hated
companies in our country? I feel like I'd rank them almost up there with
Halliburton, Sodexo and Blackwater.

First of all they are incredibly expensive. They try to actively create worse
experiences for their customers. Forced inclusions of apps on android phones
on mobile carriers. A comcast rep wanted to install a browser toolbar on my
computer. Vague billing that leads to sticker shock. $0.25 per tiny little
text message, really? I paid next to nothing to post this comment on HN, but
had I posted such large amounts of text via a text message, it would have cost
a lot of money.

Talk to them on the phone and they try to sell you things you don't need. Like
one time I wanted to get HBO, HBO costs $15 a month, period, but when you talk
to them on the phone they wont tell you that unless you ask a specific
question, they'll tell you about their bundles which will cost you hundreds of
dollars extra. This is a really scummy thing to do. They know the person who
contacted them only wants HBO, but then they sell them something way worse
they didn't want.

Collusion with illegal federal programs that involved lying to congress, lying
to our public representatives. These companies are filled with scum from top
to bottom. The people that you deal with in the stores, the people that decide
which phones you can buy at their store and what they have on them, the people
you talk to on the phone, the executives. It must be like working for a
tobacco company, once you're willing to work at such a place the culture just
destroys your integrity or something. I have no idea. I even still
considerably distrust tmobile, even though they seem to be trying to change
things.

~~~
sillysaurus3
_isn 't it amazing how the companies that provide us with access to the
internet are pretty much among the most hated companies in our country? I feel
like I'd rank them almost up there with Halliburton, Sodexo and Blackwater._

Blackwater is a company whose employees kill people. Sometimes civilians. And
sometimes for no reason.

[https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/blackwater-
gui...](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/blackwater-guilty-
verdicts/)

 _The incident for which the men were tried was the single largest known
massacre of Iraqi civilians at the hands of private U.S. security contractors.
Known as “Baghdad’s bloody Sunday,” operatives from Blackwater gunned down 17
Iraqi civilians at a crowded intersection at Nisour Square on September 16,
2007._

If, after reading this, anyone is still nodding their head and entertaining
the idea that their internet company is in the same league as Blackwater, then
they have some pretty strange value judgments.

~~~
chime
> If, after reading this, anyone is still nodding their head and entertaining
> the idea that their internet company is in the same league as Blackwater,
> then they have some pretty strange value judgments.

We can get really philosophical about this if you want. Is it worse to kill 1
person or dismember 100? Is it worse to bankrupt one person or steal $1 from a
million? If the perpetrator is a single entity, then courts have precedents to
punish appropriately. But what if it is a systemic theft where a million
people are involved in making hundred million others suffer slightly? Is that
somehow "less wrong" than 5 people killing 25?

What if one of the hundred million suffering slightly, missing school work, or
work assignments because of bandwidth theft, and loses grade or job and
consequently, a chance at productive life? Every time my home internet goes
down, I lose a chance at being productive, meeting my deadlines, and making
money.

We have started placing a lot more importance over the last few decades on
violent crimes committed against a few over white collar crimes that
marginally impact millions. Violent crimes against a few will never stop as
long as humans continue to be humans. However, by excusing the white collar
crimes that steal pennies from everyone, we are slowly chipping away at our
standard of living. Banks charge fees incorrectly and get away with it.
Cellphone companies do the same. Insurance companies do the same. Since nobody
in a large company can be held guilty for distributed crimes, every large
company engages in them without consequences.

An EDI error at my wife's health insurance company caused a refusal in her
invoice. The doctor's office said "Sorry, the insurance company said they
won't cover it." Only after I read through the fine print and contacted all
parties involved, did we find out that it was an automated electronic
processing error instead of an outright denial by a human or algorithm. Nobody
got blamed for this. There is nothing I can do about this to prevent future
instances. And I am 100% certain, there are many many many others who have
just paid the $200 without putting up a fight. And then someone of them stop
getting the treatment because $200 is too much, and then suffer despite having
insurance.

You might still put outright murder in a different league than bandwidth
theft, but my point is that scale matters and we continue to ignore it because
we solely look at individual instances and go "Pfft! It's only bad 10% of the
time for 5% of the base so who cares?", ignoring that the base is 100 million
people.

~~~
niels_olson
This should be the top comment overall. The mods should sym-link it into the
root thread or something.

From a leadership perspective, understanding that seemingly minor decisions
have can horrible consequences, and how often that happens, is what makes good
leaders.

Here's one: Bancroft Hall at the US Naval Academy lacked air conditioning
until 2004. Even after plans were made, the funding was cancelled because
alumni complained that "it would make the students weak".

One admiral had the temerity to re-fund the work and got A/C installed. In
reality, not only did performance improve, 25% fewer midshipmen got sick
throughout the summer months. A total of over 500 fewer diagnoses. Multiply
that by the last 10 years, and you're quite possibly saving a life in that
5000 illnesses.

The medical director's assessment at the time: the students were probably
enjoying improved immune function due to better sleep.

When you're in charge and trying to save money for your Ferrari, don't forget
that life sucks at the bottom. Maybe you should spend that money on bigger
monitors for your help desk people instead.

Because, in truth, you're not successful only because of your hard work and
personal risk and sacrifice early on. Plenty of people worked hard, took risk,
and made sacrifices to make the organization what it is. You just won the CEO
lottery.

~~~
mgkimsal
"A total of over 500 fewer diagnoses. Multiply that by the last 10 years, and
you're quite possibly saving a life in that 5000 illnesses."

Not to mention the delays in people taking time to _get_ diagnosed, extra
costs in diagnosing, delay in treating more serious complaints, and the
cumulative effect of all of that over years.

Because some alumni didn't like the idea?

------
Someone1234
Here's the thing about these unlimited-throttling programs: They are good for
both the consumer AND cellular operator, but you have to be upfront and honest
about it.

AT&T's problem is that they just one day up and decided to start throttling
unlimited customers (down to 10-20% of their normal speed) without a warning,
and without it being made clear in any of their marketing material or
contracts.

The reason why I call these programs "good" is that they all but eliminate
overage charges from a consumer's bill. With limited data, you often get
charged excessive amounts if you go over your cap (disproportionately large
amounts at times).

So for example, if a consumer got their teenager 2 GB of data, and that
teenager ran up a 5 GB usage bill one month, that could be an additional $60
charge ($20/GB) out of the blue. Unlimited-throttled data averts that
possibility (and the teenager in this example is the only one negatively
impacted by the excess usage).

This is how T-Mobile currently operates on all of their Simple Choice plans
(both unlimited and limited). They have scrapped overage charges (so there is
no bill-shock) and instead just throttle you down.

The only major difference between what T-Mobile currently do and what AT&T
were doing, is that AT&T lied and hid it, and worse still charged customers
ETF if they left as a result. T-mobile is completely upfront about the policy
and how it is enforced.

PS - T-Mobile also do the same thing for roaming data, no overage charges.

~~~
bunderbunder
> The reason why I call these programs "good" is that they all but eliminate
> overage charges from a consumer's bill. With limited data, you often get
> charged excessive amounts if you go over your cap (disproportionately large
> amounts at times).

That's a bad solution, because it solves the wrong problem. The real problem
is overage charges.

Of all the other companies who provide me with metered service, not a single
one uses the same pricing structure where I purchase an initial quota for one
price, and then have to pay out the nose if I go over it. Everyone else just
charges a flat unit price. It's a flat $x/gal for water, $x/kW/h for
electricity, $x/m^3 for gas, $x/min for land line phone service, $x/min for
Azure compute time, etc. etc.

That style of pricing is good. It's a straightforward, easy-to-understand "pay
for what you use" model. Cell phone style pricing is worse because it's
unpredictable and consumer-hostile because it makes you feel punished for
using more of their service. _Unlimited_ cell phone pricing is worse yet. It's
supremely consumer-hostile because it forces light users to subsidize folks
who watch Netflix while riding the city bus. As a light user (and informed
consumer) I find that offer to be downright insulting; I hate it just as much
as I'd hate if the gas station wanted to charge me the same flat monthly fee
for me to buy gas for my economy car that I only use on weekend as they charge
my neighbor to top off his Escalade that he uses for a 45-minute commute.

~~~
bsder
> Everyone else just charges a flat unit price. It's a flat $x/gal for water,
> $x/kW/h for electricity, $x/m^3 for gas, $x/min for land line phone service,
> $x/min for Azure compute time, etc. etc.

Except that consumers _don 't_ like those kinds of billing plans.

Consumers like fixed bill per month. Period. A plan that charges more per
month than metered would still wins because the consumer sees it as a _fixed_
charge.

~~~
negativeview
I don't think it's fair to say that consumers overall like either one more
than the other, it depends on what we're paying FOR.

Why are consumers okay with paying a metered fee for electricity, water, and
gasoline?

There's competition and/or regulations pushing those prices into reasonable
ranges. Usage is fairly predictable. These are things that are horrible to
have suddenly shut off without warning (like what effectively happens when
you're throttled into unusability). They are things that people need in order
to be a functioning member of society in the majority of places on Earth (in
places with good public transit, gasoline gets removed from this list).

Aside from point #1, those also sound like the Internet.

~~~
bsder
> Why are consumers okay with paying a metered fee for electricity, water, and
> gasoline?

They're not. But normally they don't have a choice.

 _However_ , some of the utilities in the Northeast have plans wherein your
bill is mostly constant year round even in spite of the spikes at certain
times of the year. Lots of people like them even though they almost always
wind up paying more than they would otherwise.

~~~
kelnos
>> Why are consumers okay with paying a metered fee for electricity, water,
and gasoline?

> They're not. But normally they don't have a choice.

Wait, what? Says who? I certainly don't speak for everyone, but I'm perfectly
happy paying just for my usage of these things.

I think the difference is predictability and that the costs aren't
astronomical if you have a high-usage month. If it's colder than usual, I'd
perhaps expect to pay another 10% on my utility bill. That's reasonable and
not a hardship.

If I were to spend, say, $30/mo on a plan with 500 minutes of voice calling,
and went 100 minutes over, but was only charged, say, $6 for that overage, I'd
have no problem with that (because 30/500=0.06 and 0.06 _100=6). But instead I
get charged something like $20, which is way out of proportion to the
overage._ That's* the objection.

And I think part of it is related to an understanding of actually "using
something up". When I use more electricity, I know that I actually used
something up: that extra power came from more coal being burned, or more water
falling from a dam, or something of that nature. When I use more water, I know
that my use of it drained a reservoir a little bit more than it otherwise
would. I used up a physical good, and I'm paying for that use. If I use more
than what a regulator has decided is my "fair share", I might pay a premium
for that extra (many utilities have tiered pricing), but I'm ok with that
because I do recognize I'm using more than usual, and the added cost of the
higher tier isn't unreasonable or burdensome.

But the cost of me spending 100 extra minutes on the phone costs the carrier
basically nothing. Sure, if _everyone_ did that in a month, perhaps it would
strain the carrier's network (not that it would cause the carrier to spend
capital on increased capacity; they'd likely be fine with more dropped/failed
calls that month). In general, though, the marginal cost to the carrier when
you use more minutes than your plan provides is near zero -- and yet the
carrier charges an exorbitant markup for that overage.

------
Drakim
> began throttling data speeds in 2011 for its unlimited data plan customers
> after they used as little as 2 gigabytes of data in a billing period

This is what really gets me. I expected this sort of situation to come about
when some jackass used up 1 petabyte of bandwidth on his unlimited plan, but 2
gigabytes?

To me, that's like offering unlimited coffee refills, but stopping customers
after the second cup, with some excuse that there has to be some limits to
"unlimited".

~~~
adjwilli
Wouldn't it be more like after 2 cups they only get served in half-cup
increments? I agree with the sentiment. Unlimited with throttles isn't truly
"unlimited", but "unlimited*". That said, the FTC complaint seems to take
issue with that AT&T did not "adequately disclose to its customers" this
information. And there, I take some issue with this. AT&T did actually explain
that. Maybe some consumers didn't understand that because of the lack of an
asterisk. I guess this will be interesting to see just how important an
asterisk can be.

~~~
lawnchair_larry
I don't believe they did, especially because for grandfathered users, there is
no documentation on unlimited plans and there hasn't been for years.

~~~
adjwilli
Yeah, you're right that the grandfathered consumers are a special case. It
would be like having truly unlimited coffee refills then all of a sudden being
told you're getting half-cup intervals.

~~~
mikeash
Aren't they the only case here? AT&T hasn't offered unlimited data plans for
quite a while. They basically only had them for the original iPhone
introduction, and got rid of them seemingly as soon as they could.

------
kolbe
I've been on the AT&T unlimited plan for a long while now, and I've been
looking forward to the day when I get a $10 settlement check in the mail
whilst some law firm pulls in $200mm in legal fees.

~~~
philmcc
$10 or... $850.

One person sued them in small claims court and won.
([http://www.mactech.com/2012/02/27/how-fight-att-data-
throttl...](http://www.mactech.com/2012/02/27/how-fight-att-data-throttling-
small-claims-action))

He outlines the steps on his website.
([http://www.taporc.com/](http://www.taporc.com/))

~~~
baddox
Still, $850 is only a little over a year of my Internet bill.

~~~
higherpurpose
Only because your Internet is so expensive. I pay $13 for 200 Mbps down.

~~~
hsod
Are you just bragging or do you have a point?

------
nerdtalker
AT&T silently killed what formerly was an unlimited plan out of the blue one
day, and not many people noticed. I would constantly run into the 3 GB limit a
week or two into the month and then suffer through the slow throttled 0.5 Mbps
rates for the rest of the billing cycle in agony.

At that point I realized I was essentially paying for a 3 GB data plan
(remember, no tethering provisioning was included or even could be added)
under the auspices of an 'unlimited' tier. I switched to mobile shared but
that turned out to be a huge mistake for other reasons (among which was that
corporate discount codes didn't apply to the $30 phone fee on top of the
bucket charge), and then shortly after that left for T-Mobile where I now have
a real unlimited plan for less money. Not the full speed tiers + throttled
data after that plan mind you, the actual unlimited plan.

What's really disappointing is that it took the FTC until now to build a case
or whatever legal burden is required to go after AT&T for their elaborate
bait-and-switch. This is years after the fact, and I wonder how much extra
money AT&T made as a result.

~~~
sleazebreeze
What did you think was a mistake about the mobile shared plan? I just switched
to that for my single device and I was enjoying the money saved. Am I missing
a "gotcha"?

~~~
nerdtalker
My problems were really two fold:

* I previously had a 23% discount (FAN code) on my account which applied to the unlimited data lines in a favorable way. In essence, it applied to both the $30/month data fee for Unlimited, and the couple hundred minutes of call and unlimited text family plan which were sort of an umbrella for all the lines. With mobile shared, one of the gotchas I didn't discover until well after the first bill (since the perpetual excuse with a FAN code discount is – it takes a while to apply) was that the discount applies only to the mobile shared data bucket charge, not to the $30/phone, $x/tablet, $x/modem device access charge line items which quickly add up if you have more than a single line. This really threw off the math I had done for affordability and made it more expensive for me.

* The tiers previously were structured a bit differently, and with the two lines I had plus another person, I would always hit the 10 GB I had signed up for, then pay the $15/GB overage. Going to the next tier up to avoid paying overage for a GB or two would've still been more expensive, so like clockwork I would always end up paying some overages. Since then they've doubled some of the larger tiers as a reactionary measure.

Affordability wise quite honestly AT&T is close to parity with T-Mobile if you
manage to get the mobile shared value plans which have cheaper monthly rates
if you bring your own device or buy without a contract.

------
adamfeldman
I've been on a (now grandfathered) 'unlimited' data plan with AT&T since 2008
(iPhone 3G > 4S > 5S). Can confirm the throttling, lately after 3GB of data
usage in a billing period

~~~
ChuckMcM
A friend of mine was staying with AT&T because they had the grandfathered in
'unlimited' plan but when they figured out it really was a 2GB plan and a
throttle that let them change carriers without feeling like they were "losing"
something.

~~~
famousactress
This is exactly where I'm at now. Been evaluating leaving our unlimited data
plan because it seems it's effectively a 3gig plan that doesn't allow
tethering. For the same cost I think I can get 6G shared with my wife and
tether if I need to.

------
RankingMember
For people in the U.S./Canada looking for a provider who gives a shit and who
live in an area with decent Sprint coverage, check out Ting. I've been using
them for about 2 years now and they've been rock solid (I am in no way
affiliated with them, I'm just that happy with them).

The closest reasonable thing to sending photocopies of your middle finger in
their (Verizon/AT&T) "business reply" spam postal mailings is giving someone
else who kicks ass your business (don't do the photocopy thing, the people who
have to open and transcribe those things don't like Verizon/AT&T either).

~~~
__david__
I want to like Ting—my sister uses it and loves it, but they don't let you run
the latest iPhones and that's a deal breaker for me. :-(

~~~
RankingMember
Yeah, the blackout period Sprint holds them to has shrunk over time, but if
you're riding the bleeding edge you won't be happy with the delay.

------
morganvachon
So, I wonder if this is the first salvo in a war on all the major carriers who
use the same "unlimited but throttled" marketing scheme? If AT&T loses this
one, will the FTC go after T-Mobile and Sprint, who also do this? (Verizon
doesn't offer unlimited data to new customers, but had kept it going for
grandfathered customers, and backed off from plans to throttle them[1]).

[1] [http://www.cnet.com/news/verizon-backs-off-on-plans-to-
throt...](http://www.cnet.com/news/verizon-backs-off-on-plans-to-throttle-
unlimited-data-users/)

~~~
maxsilver
I am not a lawyer, but from reading the link, it sounds like the problem isn't
that they throttled the data, but that they hid/lied about it.

Neither T-Mobile or Sprint hide the fact that they throttle / rate limit their
subscribers for various reasons. So presumably, they are less at risk here.

~~~
morganvachon
As a former Sprint customer, I'll disagree about that particular carrier.
Sprint has offered "unlimited" data for a long time, but after they finally
got the iPhone a few years ago, they saw a surge in data usage and started
implementing undisclosed and seemingly random soft caps on all their unlimited
data customers, all while claiming they offered "truly unlimited data" that
wasn't throttled. They have only very recently admitted[1] to throttling some
of their customers, but it's actually been going on for a long time according
to customer complaints in their support site.

As for T-Mobile, it's my understanding that they changed their policy to
include the possibility of throttling and initially didn't disclose it until
it was leaked[2].

Of course, neither of these situations are as customer-hostile as AT&T has
been, so maybe the FTC won't go after them. But I wouldn't be surprised if
Sprint and T-Mobile make changes to their policies if AT&T loses.

[1] [http://bgr.com/2014/05/08/sprint-throttling-unlimited-
data-d...](http://bgr.com/2014/05/08/sprint-throttling-unlimited-data-death/)

[2][http://bgr.com/2014/08/13/t-mobile-unlimited-data-
throttling...](http://bgr.com/2014/08/13/t-mobile-unlimited-data-throttling-
memo/)

------
jqm
There is debate on the thread about whether or not low level AT&T employees
are scum...

I don't claim to know, but a funny thing happened a few weeks ago. My
girlfriends android phone was acting up and shutting off randomly. So she took
it to the AT&T store to have it reinstalled (I don't know much about
smartphones and didn't want to play with it). So, in the middle of the day, I
get an angry call from her accusing me of installing Linux on her smartphone
(and why not? I install Linux on everything else...It must have been me!). The
guy at the AT&T store told her since I had installed Linux there was nothing
he could do for the phone and couldn't reinstall it nor repair it. I protested
my innocence but she said the guy in the store had given her proof and she
would show me that night. (I was actually a little curious as this was the
first I had heard of Linux proper running on a stock android phone). So when
the moment of proof came, she pulled up an android screen with the kernel
version and there it was... at the bottom of the screen in bold white
letters... "SELinux status". Proof! I mean, it said Linux!

So maybe they aren't evil, but that guy at least left me wondering about their
general competency. I laughed for half an hour solid imagining all the Linux
infected phones he must be seeing coming in.... Or more likely, he was just
trying to sell her a new phone.

------
denzil_correa
I hope this is the beginning of the end of Fair Usage Policies (FUP) masked as
"unlimited Internet". The best part of the release was the note

> The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the
> law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a
> proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

------
dumbfounder
I had the unlimited plan for several years and was shocked and outraged to
find that they were throttling after I reached a certain limit.

So I switched to Sprint's unlimited plan and now I can rest at ease that I
have a consistent experience. My bandwidth is now throttled 100% of the time
by the crappiness of their network.

------
us0r
While this appears good, this is nothing more then a show. AT&T will end up
paying virtually nothing[1]. If you get angry when companies like Microsoft
can go and seize domains, property and anything else in civil matters - this
lovely agency has helped pave most of the way for them. The bulk of their
cases come with Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order's and Asset Freezes[1].

What will likely be the most egregious offender with the highest amount of
"consumer damage" (AT&T) they don't even use the word "scam" or "fraud" in the
complaint or press release. AT&T has already won. I doubt anyone there is
losing any sleep over this.

[1] - [http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-
proceedings](http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings)

------
twoodfin
I don't see how anybody wins from this complaint. AT&T already no longer
offers any unlimited plans to new customers, and the most likely outcome will
be to no longer offer renewals of the existing grandfathered plans.

It's not as if anyone on those plans using 5GB+ a month isn't already aware of
the throttling: AT&T is pretty good about notifying you when you are close to
or over the limit.

I guess a settlement might let some folks in the middle of their contact get
out easier.

But personally, even considered as just a 5GB/line plan, my grandfathered plan
is cheaper than anything currently offered (almost even before you account for
the $450/line device subsidy!). Probably won't be the case in two years when
I'm up again, but for now I'm glad the FTC didn't file this complaint a few
months ago.

~~~
lnanek2
> AT&T is pretty good about notifying you when you are close to or over the
> limit.

I am currently and have been for years on an unlimited data plan with AT&T,
easily use over 5GB a month, and have never been notified of any limit ever.

My wife is on a standard plan and gets notified when she goes over. AT&T does
not notify unlimited users.

~~~
twoodfin
Weird. I got a text today that I'm getting close.

Regardless, it's not as if you were unaware of the limit before this suit.

------
sswaner
I made the mistake of downloading over 20GB of music and files on my new
iPhone 6. The phone has been almost useless since hitting that limit. So much
for "Unlimited Data".

But, I am waiting for a check for over $1300 as part of a class action
settlement with AT&T after being overfilled for service.

------
eyeareque
I love seeing AT&T getting this kind of attention from the FTC for their
terrible, terrible, monopolistic and greedy tactics. Their goal is to squeeze
every penny they possibly can out of their customers. Their service has always
been subpar.

I really hope that this lawsuit costs AT&T a lot of money; It needs to hurt in
order to teach them a lesson.

One can only hope that we can someday have a competitive wireless market with
5+ options for consumers to choose from. That is when customer service will
become real.

------
userbinator
I wonder if anyone would like clearly-advertised "unlimited data, harmonic
throttling":

First X amount of data at full speed

Second X amount of data at 1/2 of full speed

Third X amount of data at 1/3 of full speed

Fourth X amount of data at 1/4 of full speed

etc...

(With perhaps prices based on what that X is, or the decrease in speed could
be more gradual.)

This is clearly "unlimited" since you can transfer as much data as you want,
it just takes a little longer for each additional amount (until the next
billing period). :-)

~~~
StevenXC
Let's say you get your nth X GB at XGB/(1000n)s. Then in a
month=2628000seconds, you'd get at most about (70X)-ish GB per month.
Meanwhile, if you get a flat X GB at XGB/(1000)s, then you get up to (2628X)
GB per month. That sure doesn't feel unlimited in comparison.... but I suppose
when I put it that way, all data plans are limited by finite time. :-)

------
mrbill
I'm on the $60-70/month T-Mobile plan that gives me truly unlimited 4G data;
no throttling. I might not use more than 2G a month most of the time, but if I
need to use more, I don't have to worry (such as when I had to go out of state
when a family member had emergency surgery a couple of months ago).

I wouldn't switch back to AT&T as a wireless carrier even if someone paid me
every month.

------
ozarius
Can't wait to send in the threatening email that i received from AT&T stating
explicitly that my "unlimited" bandwidth will be throttled because i happened
to be in a high usage area. Seriously there should be a place where everyone
who received such emails can post them en masse...

------
post_break
I left AT&T because of this. My iPhone went dead data wise after 3GB of usage,
on unlimited data plan. We went to arbitration and they let me out of my
contract, and unlocked my phone. They clearly know they are ripping people off
trying to force them to nickel and dime the tiered plans.

------
peterwwillis
Do people actually think that wireless carriers have the bandwidth to handle
everyone streaming HD at once? They throttle so there's headroom for spikes in
overly-saturated network segments. It's not like they just don't like it when
you use their service.

~~~
devb
That's a great theory, but what are the actual limits? Why not introduce
throttling to everyone at once only at times of actual spikes instead of
forcing me to sit through a week of having an essentially useless phone until
the billing cycle goes through?

More importantly, why the hell are millions of people paying for something
that they were promised but aren't getting?

------
fady
I have an unlimited data plan as well and I am 100 percent positive that AT&T
throttles at 5 gigabytes and when they do its really bad, like .6 megabits per
second down :(

------
oamoruwa
AT&T can't be the only operator guilty of such throttling. A previous article
was published about Verizon also considering implementing throttling data
consumption.

------
wpaprocki
I work for a telco reseller. We make our money by selling the same services as
the big guys without being assholes about it. We make a lot of money.

------
mpg33
At least you Americans have some choice. Here in Canada there are only 3
(nation-wide) carriers with virtually the same plans/prices.

------
greyfox
arent these cell companies really misleading every customer by charging them
for Minutes, SMS, AND Data, when really all that needs to be given to the
customer is an ip address that one can call/text/email etc.? i've never
understood why our phone numbers arent ip's they seem to be a converging set
of numbers at this rate anyways.

------
robert_nsu
Here I thought I was being capped around 5gb. I didn't ditch the "unlimited"
data plan until late 2013.

------
lukasb
Apart from a $10 settlement check, what's likely to happen to grandfathered
unlimited / unthrottled plans?

~~~
smackfu
Here is what the FTC says would have been valid options:

"Defendant has numerous alternative ways to reduce data usage on its network
that do not involve violating its promise to customers. One alternative would
involve Defendant requiring existing unlimited data customers to switch to a
tiered data plan at renewal. ... Another alternative would involve Defendant
introducing its throttling program at renewal, with disclosures at point of
sale. ... Yet other alternatives might include limited, narrowly tailored
throttling programs that are consistent with Defendant’s contracts,
advertising, and other public disclosures. "

So essentially, you'd end up in the same place, but you would have to be
informed about it. And might be able to leave without ETF.

~~~
shostack
Which is really the way it should work. Let AT&T have all the crappy customer-
hostile policies they want as long as they fully disclose it in a sufficient
manner to their customers.

Then, their customers can vote with their money and go to a competitor that
offers more for their money. That's the way it SHOULD work, but probably won't
:(

------
hernan6042
This 'unlimited' term is very misleading. Every connection that has a
bandwidth cap will be tied and limited by that cap. ie. 10mb/s is limited to
10mb/s period. There is no such thing as 'unlimited' unless of course the
connection has no virtual cap, then that would be considered unlimited.

So every connection plan as we know is limited and never unlimited.

Thoughts?

~~~
gtk40
It's pretty high though. For example, unlimited 10mb/s in a month is over
26TB.

------
barce
Sprint does the same thing but at 5GB. Just a data point from a former Sprint
customer.

------
lewis_b_real
And there is absolutely no meaningful way to hold them accountable.

------
davidholmesnyc
I dream one day we will all have 1 Gig per second up and down on our mobile
phones and it will cost less than a gallon of milk. A man can dream can't he
lol .

------
cevaris
Soooo, no throttling by ISP's is next?

------
jrgifford
SURPRISE!

