tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One | reply to ptrowski
Re: Sketchy
Is too!  |
|
quatrix
Premium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL | reply to Enlightener
Please stop calling people stupid names when you don't agree with their opinions. People who throw around the word "troll" are worse than the ones they're accusing. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to Maccawolf
When there was no 'law', AT&T essentially allowed it. Typically AT&T and many others tend to blanket cover themselves (i.e. 'anything other than WAP / MMS / SMS covered by MEdia Net is forbidden, such as VoIP, p2p, or anything 'we' deem bad'.
This is something that I would have expected out of AT&T.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski  :I tried to search about what the terms were, but there is no way to tell if the terms were changed or not. at&t is one of the few who has the policy of notification before any change in terms. If they don't notify you, your terms didn't change, even if new signups have different terms under which they get service.
Contrast this with Sprint, who not only doesn't require notification, only posting on their website, but if you use the phone after they post the new terms on the website, you've accepted whatever they decided to put in there without telling you.
On the bright side with them, at least the terms are easier to find. You're not stuck digging through your closet looking for the contract you signed.
One thing that does annoy me about at&t is that they don't have a policy of sending you a paper copy of the terms under which a particular feature operates when you sign up over the phone. You do in store (on the rare occasion that reps actually give you all the paperwork they're supposed to), but on the phone, you're pretty much out of luck unless you think to ask, and even then I don't know that they can mail you a copy.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
| reply to fancydancer
said by fancydancer :said by Maccawolf :while I personally agree with you, the law is "ignorance is no excuse of the law" I agree with your quote, but if ATT omitted to say it was allowed or prohibited, then it is not a "law" True. And even if it were explicitly stated, it would be a "Term of Service," not a law. But I'm splitting hairs. |
|
fancydancer
Perception is reality
Premium
join:2002-08-28
Springfield, IL
clubs:
·Comcast
·Insight Communicat..
| reply to Maccawolf
said by Maccawolf :while I personally agree with you, the law is "ignorance is no excuse of the law" I agree with your quote, but if ATT omitted to say it was allowed or prohibited, then it is not a "law"
--
Thank you for keeping this a work-free environment! |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX | reply to ptrowski
Please stop feeding the troll. |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·VOIPo
·Metrocast Communic..
·AT&T DSL Service
·ViaTalk
| reply to Maccawolf
said by Maccawolf :BTW, you know what happens when you ASSUME, don't you? You get hit with a higher rate?  |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs: | reply to wierdo
I tried to search about what the terms were, but there is no way to tell if the terms were changed or not. |
|
Maccawolf
Premium
join:2001-02-20
Hillsdale, NJ
| reply to en102
said by en102 :Exactly. It wasn't part of the terms mentioned as acceptable OR prohibited. Since it wasn't mentioned at all, one would assume that it is ok. while I personally agree with you, the law is
"ignorance is no excuse of the law"
BTW, you know what happens when you ASSUME, don't you?
--
Mom and Crockett...... I miss you both! |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski :Plus knowing AT&T, if it was strictly prohibited they would sock people with charges instead of just change the plan. You can only know them by their written policies, which don't allow for any penalty for misuse of a data plan except removal of that plan. They can't add a different plan or add a different feature (like pay-per-use data) and remain within their written policies.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski :People used it within the terms that AT&T set. Hardly sketchy. Or not. Unless at&t is stupid, which is quite possible. They've had no-tethering terms on the postpaid MEdiaNet Unlimited plans for several years now. (either '04 or '05) They made the mistake of not having those terms (or international data roaming fees) in their original MEdia Works Unlimited plans.
Surely they remembered to put the same clause in the prepaid version of the data plan.
Of course, I'm a hypocrite. I don't have those terms, and if I did, I wouldn't pay attention to them.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word. |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·VOIPo
·Metrocast Communic..
·AT&T DSL Service
·ViaTalk
| reply to ninjatutle
Ok, this is fun.
My point is saying it is "sktechy" without showing "why" you think it is sketchy is silly.
Plus knowing AT&T, if it was strictly prohibited they would sock people with charges instead of just change the plan.
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to ptrowski
Who says it wasn't? |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs: | reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :Who says it wasn't prohibited? Who said it was? |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to ptrowski
Who says it wasn't prohibited? |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·VOIPo
·Metrocast Communic..
·AT&T DSL Service
·ViaTalk
| reply to en102
said by en102 :Exactly. It wasn't part of the terms mentioned as acceptable OR prohibited. Since it wasn't mentioned at all, one would assume that it is ok. Bingo!
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to ptrowski
Exactly. It wasn't part of the terms mentioned as acceptable OR prohibited. Since it wasn't mentioned at all, one would assume that it is ok.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs:
·VOIPo
·Metrocast Communic..
·AT&T DSL Service
·ViaTalk
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :It was sketch because tethering was not apart of the terms. I looked into it at the time and figured it would be shut down at any time so I didn't pay the early term to do this. I would have ended up with more money in my pocket each month. Since it was not a part of the terms I would not call it sketchy. It was not prohibited.
--
"A religious war is like children fighting over who has the strongest imaginary friend."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to ptrowski
It was sketch because tethering was not apart of the terms. I looked into it at the time and figured it would be shut down at any time so I didn't pay the early term to do this. I would have ended up with more money in my pocket each month. |
|
