Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
1 edit | Legal?
I don't see how that would be any less legal than those checks you get for $20 in the mail every single day that say 'By cashing this check, you agree to have your phone service switched to (some other company)' |
|
jwsmiths4
Part Man, Part Mac
Premium
join:2003-10-25
Savannah, GA | Awesome!
Would be very interesting to see if this really would hold up in court -- not that I'd count on it, but it would be a cool case to see none the less. |
|
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL | That's great!
This one had me lol. I wonder what type of response we would get if everyone did this? If the user EULA talked about privacy rights, that might be another issue in the courts. |
|
B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Illiterate Lawyer
What English-speaking "lawyer" could possibly approve this childish language?
if you fail to take my payment as is then you give up the right to go after me for money and also give up the right to disconnect my service -- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function |
|
jwersan
R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, and Max.
Premium
join:2004-12-20
Port Jefferson Station, NY
clubs: | reply to cbrigante2
Re: That's great!
God I WISH this would hold up in court....
I wonder if a USER EULA is legal??? |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
| The original EULA
I bet most ISP's have a clause in their EULA that says the user is not allowed to specify their own terms, and any other terms the user forces the ISP to accept are null and void. I'm not sure if they do have that, I'm just guessing. If they don't now, they will soon. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| it is legitimate
I don't remember the details, but some years ago a guy did something very similar - wrote on the back of a check that by cashing it, a company agreed to abide by whatever he had stipulated. The company violated the stipulation and he took them to court and won. |
|
ITOscar
join:2004-08-04
Dayton, OH | reply to B
Re: Illiterate Lawyer
I have to agree with this - doesn't sound like any lawyer approved license agreement i have evr read |
|
Newegg
Supreme Ideology
join:2004-11-14
Atlanta, GA | reply to B
Ya it's not that well written. |
|
rtcpenguin
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Fairfax, VA
·Cox HSI
| reply to B
said by B  :What English-speaking "lawyer" could possibly approve this childish language? if you fail to take my payment as is then you give up the right to go after me for money and also give up the right to disconnect my service -- B True...also "refuse to cap/throttling my service" was a little strange.
Funny still, but I doubt they would accept it.
--
Will you still remember, There behind the skies, Walking on the embers, Standing in their light -FF |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | reply to B
"Failing to take my money" doesn't signify the positive acceptance of an agreement. You can't say "by cashing this check you agree to ABC, by failing to cash this check you agree to XYZ." |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to B
It's not just the phrasing of it. How can you force someone to do something if they don't accept your EULA? Especially something like continue to provide service (at no cost since they won't cash his EULA-payments). Imagine the uproar if a cable ISP put a clause in their EULA stating "if you leave our service you agree not to use a competing service for a period of one year."
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ |
|
Mtav80
Premium
join:2002-12-28
Loveland, CO | reply to Ark
Re: Legal?
Legal or not it is funny.  |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to Ark
Well, those checks aren't payment for services rendered. In that case, the check is a waiver of some entry fee. E.g. It costs $20 to sign up so here's a check for $20 and we'll sign you up when you cash it.
In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. He owes them a debt and must pay it up. He can't stipulate terms at this point. Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes?
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ |
|
scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| reply to nasadude
Re: it is legitimate
Rogers being a Canadian corporation would be subject to Canadian law. I don't know if it's any more or less restrictive, but legitimate in this case is based on jurisdiction.
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. |
|
scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| reply to Jason Levine
Re: Legal?
Don't most cable company's bill you ahead of the period? I know I got my May RR bill last week. If that's the case it's not for "services rendered" but more a payment for future services.
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. |
|
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine :Well, those checks aren't payment for services rendered. In that case, the check is a waiver of some entry fee. E.g. It costs $20 to sign up so here's a check for $20 and we'll sign you up when you cash it. Well then just say the terms on the check are just for starting with the next upcoming billing cycle. I don't really see how this changes anything.
said by Jason Levine :In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. He owes them a debt and must pay it up. He can't stipulate terms at this point. Debt doesn't mean he cannot stipulate terms. I don't believe they are obligated to accept the payment if it has attached terms, but the fact that its debt is meaningless here. They can very well refuse payment and disconnect him. Any part of his little agreement that tries to say what they can do if they don't accept the payment is obviously a joke.
said by Jason Levine :Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes? If the meal or services was bad, perhaps I would. That is probably a lot more common in some other countries than we would guess here too. |
|
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to scomps
Yes, actually, most probably do. I know I was billed in advance for Comcrap's $60 basic cable (no internet) before I switched to Dish. 5 months after I disconnected, I got a refund check for $46 in the mail for a partial month refund. I had completely forgot all about that. That refund covers a month and a half of Dish service, which is also billed in advance. |
|
thesus
join:2005-04-19
Erie, PA
|  reply to Jason Levine
Actually most users pay for services on the next month, just like if you rent a house you pay for living there the next month, so if you look at it that way then yes it is leagal for him to make such claims, however if you look further down this
thread, yes, most ISP's do have clauses that after the initial
contract is signed that no new stipulations/changes can be ammended by the user, however it can be ammended by the ISP. BTW i do work for an ISP. |
|
DiskDrive
Goin' In Circles
Premium
join:2004-11-03
Farmington, MI
| reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine :In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. I agree that the text as stipulated is on shaky ground (especially the clauses for not accepting the payment). That said, in most cases, bills for things like telecommunications services (POTS, cell phones, cable TV, Internet services, etc.) are usually billed in advance of the service period they cover. Excess usage charges, long distance, PPV, etc. are often the only things billed in arrears. |
|
