Tethered Data Connection Plans

In article <[email protected]>,
David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

....

> I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
> think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
> terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
> the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
> this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
> serious problem with using the service for tethering.
>
> But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
> say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
> and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
> we can, if we want, remove you from it."
....

I've just read the MEdia Net Subscriber Agreement. Unless I missed it,
there is not a word about agreeing not to tether. So as far as I can
tell, if I chose to try tethering again, I would not be breaking any
agreement, explicit or implicit, with Cingular--merely doing something
they don't support and feel free to stop me from doing if they want.

Am I missing anything?

On a related subject ... . What about PDA/smart phones? If you have a
Treo 650, can you use it with Media Net--again, unsupported?

--
Remove NOPSAM to email
www.daviddfriedman.com

---

› See More: Tethered Data Connection Plans

"David Friedman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
> think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
> terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
> the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
> this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
> serious problem with using the service for tethering.

>
Very well put, David. This is something that is quickly forgotten by many
consumers.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005
10:38:38 -0800, David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <H%%[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 06:44:20
>> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >[email protected] wrote:
>> >
>> >> MediaNet Unlimited is $19.99 and prohibits tethering.
>> >
>> >Read what the legal terms actually say.
>>
>> MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular reserves
>> the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for the use of
>> a wireless device as an interface to other devices or networks, as
>> determined by Cingular, including but not limited to device
>> tethering.
>>
>> >It doesn't really matter if you had MediNet prior to the addition of the
>> >legalese regarding tethering, Cingular can still remove you from the
>> >plan for any reason.
>>
>> Actually it does matter, because Cingular can't make a significant change to
>> the terms without letting you out of your subscriber agreement without
>> penalty.
>
>I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
>think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
>terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
>the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
>this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
>serious problem with using the service for tethering.
>
>But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
>say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
>and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
>we can, if we want, remove you from it."

The serious downside is that without the data package, the charges for your
data use could be astronomical.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

David Friedman wrote:

> But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
> say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
> and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
> we can, if we want, remove you from it."

Exactly. It doesn't say that they can charge you some exorbitant fee if
they decide that your tethered use is excessive, just that they can
terminate your MediaNet service. And of course even for those that
signed up for MediaNet prior to the change in terms, it still doesn't
mean that Cingular can't terminate your MediaNet service, they can do
whatever they damn please. The most that they would have to do is to let
you out of any early termination fees. Carriers often change terms with
subscribers being given the option of terminating service without an ETF.

> Of course, the moral problem would be more serious if my previous
> experiment with tethering--at a point when I did not think there was any
> rule against it, and there may not have been--hadn't worked so badly
> that I eventually gave up on it, with connections rarely lasting more
> than a few minutes.

It may be intentional on the part of Cingular to make tethering
unattractive.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005
10:46:30 -0800, David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>...
>
>> I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
>> think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
>> terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
>> the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
>> this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
>> serious problem with using the service for tethering.
>>
>> But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
>> say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
>> and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
>> we can, if we want, remove you from it."
>...
>
>I've just read the MEdia Net Subscriber Agreement. Unless I missed it,
>there is not a word about agreeing not to tether. So as far as I can
>tell, if I chose to try tethering again, I would not be breaking any
>agreement, explicit or implicit, with Cingular--merely doing something
>they don't support and feel free to stop me from doing if they want.
>
>Am I missing anything?

<https://cingular.com/media/media_net_purchase>
Bottom of the page: View our MEdia Legal Notices
<http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>.
Incorporated into the Subscriber Agreement by reference.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:

> > MediaNet Unlimited is $19.99 and prohibits tethering.

> Read what the legal terms actually say. Cingular is not explicitly
> prohibiting tethering.

<http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>
"MEdia Net packages are not available on PDAs, RIM devices, or PC card
modems. MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. "

Okay. There's weasel room there. I will stop using the word "prohibits'.

"Cingular reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages
for the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to device
tethering. "

The Terms of Service refer to moving you to an appropriate package. To me,
that would suggest a bump up to Laptop Connect at $60-79. That wouldn't be
too bad. This page doesn't reference moving you, just removing you, which,
at $0.01 per KB, would be a bad thing in a hurry.


Strictly using my phone, no tethering, http://www.google.com/glm might
transfer many megabytes per month. http://www.opera.com/mini might also be
a lot of data.

If Cingular is deciding who is tethering based on the MB of data being
used, mistakes could be made. My Motorola v551 clearly keeps track of
"internal data" verses "external data". I don't know if Cingular has
access to that counter.


--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:03:18 +0000 (UTC),
[email protected] wrote:

>If Cingular is deciding who is tethering based on the MB of data being
>used, mistakes could be made. My Motorola v551 clearly keeps track of
>"internal data" verses "external data". I don't know if Cingular has
>access to that counter.

No need: Cingular accurately tracks how much data you use as part of its back
end billing system.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In article <[email protected]>,
SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> David Friedman wrote:
>
> > But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
> > say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
> > and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
> > we can, if we want, remove you from it."
>
> Exactly. It doesn't say that they can charge you some exorbitant fee if
> they decide that your tethered use is excessive, just that they can
> terminate your MediaNet service. And of course even for those that
> signed up for MediaNet prior to the change in terms, it still doesn't
> mean that Cingular can't terminate your MediaNet service, they can do
> whatever they damn please. The most that they would have to do is to let
> you out of any early termination fees. Carriers often change terms with
> subscribers being given the option of terminating service without an ETF.
>
> > Of course, the moral problem would be more serious if my previous
> > experiment with tethering--at a point when I did not think there was any
> > rule against it, and there may not have been--hadn't worked so badly
> > that I eventually gave up on it, with connections rarely lasting more
> > than a few minutes.
>
> It may be intentional on the part of Cingular to make tethering
> unattractive.

Except that other people claim to have done with no serious problem.

--
Remove NOPSAM to email
www.daviddfriedman.com

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005
> 10:38:38 -0800, David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <H%%[email protected]>,
> > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 06:44:20
> >> -0800, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >[email protected] wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> MediaNet Unlimited is $19.99 and prohibits tethering.
> >> >
> >> >Read what the legal terms actually say.
> >>
> >> MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular reserves
> >> the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for the use of
> >> a wireless device as an interface to other devices or networks, as
> >> determined by Cingular, including but not limited to device
> >> tethering.
> >>
> >> >It doesn't really matter if you had MediNet prior to the addition of the
> >> >legalese regarding tethering, Cingular can still remove you from the
> >> >plan for any reason.
> >>
> >> Actually it does matter, because Cingular can't make a significant change
> >> to
> >> the terms without letting you out of your subscriber agreement without
> >> penalty.
> >
> >I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
> >think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
> >terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
> >the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
> >this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
> >serious problem with using the service for tethering.
> >
> >But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
> >say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
> >and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
> >we can, if we want, remove you from it."
>
> The serious downside is that without the data package, the charges for your
> data use could be astronomical.

I thought the 19.99 package, which I had for a month or two, included
unlimited data use. I assume that if they terminate it, for tethering or
other reasons, they have to tell you.

--
Remove NOPSAM to email
www.daviddfriedman.com

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005
> 10:46:30 -0800, David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >...
> >
> >> I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue. I don't
> >> think firms I deal with have any obligation to offer me the particular
> >> terms I want, any more than I have any obligation to buy from them on
> >> the particular terms they want. So if Cingular says "we are selling you
> >> this service on condition that you don't use it for tethering," I have a
> >> serious problem with using the service for tethering.
> >>
> >> But looking at the quoted bit above, it looks as though they don't quite
> >> say that. It can be read as "we are not providing it for that purpose,
> >> and might get annoyed at your using it for that purpose, in which case
> >> we can, if we want, remove you from it."
> >...
> >
> >I've just read the MEdia Net Subscriber Agreement. Unless I missed it,
> >there is not a word about agreeing not to tether. So as far as I can
> >tell, if I chose to try tethering again, I would not be breaking any
> >agreement, explicit or implicit, with Cingular--merely doing something
> >they don't support and feel free to stop me from doing if they want.
> >
> >Am I missing anything?
>
> <https://cingular.com/media/media_net_purchase>
> Bottom of the page: View our MEdia Legal Notices
> <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>.
> Incorporated into the Subscriber Agreement by reference.

That's what I was looking at.

"Your use of the service, or signed acknowledgement, will indicate your
acceptance of all of the following terms. "

That can't refer to the "General Conditions for MEdia Services," which
is where the bit about tethering appears, because that bit is preceding,
not following. Pretty clearly, the acceptance is of the subscriber
agreement, which says nothing I can see about either the "General
conditions" or tethering.

"You further acknowledge that this Agreement and all other present and
future written agreements between you and Cingular Wireless constitute
the complete statement of the agreement between you and Cingular
Wireless, and that the agreement does not include any other or prior
contemporaneous promises, representations or descriptions regarding the
Service or the Information even if it were contained in materials
provided by Cingular Wireless."

For instance, the "general conditions."

Again, are there words I am missing? It looks to me as though the
subscriber agreement is almost entirely about releasing Cingular from
liability either for things you do or for things they do, and explicitly
says that it does not include "descriptions" even if from Cingular.

--
Remove NOPSAM to email
www.daviddfriedman.com

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:03:18 +0000 (UTC),
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>>If Cingular is deciding who is tethering based on the MB of data being
>>used, mistakes could be made. My Motorola v551 clearly keeps track of
>>"internal data" verses "external data". I don't know if Cingular has
>>access to that counter.
>
> No need: Cingular accurately tracks how much data you use as part of its
> back
> end billing system.
>
> --
Source? Or is this another uneducated guess?

David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue.

> So if Cingular says "we are selling you this service on condition that
> you don't use it for tethering," I have a serious problem with using the
> service for tethering.

I walked in to the Cingular store, and asked which phones would allow me to
tether my laptop to the internet. I was sold a Motorola v220, and a
MediaBasic package. I wasn't given any instruction on how to tether, so I
looked on the cingular page, and found tethering advice. I realized that
MediaBasic didn't offer enough data per month, so I added MediaNet.

Where does that leave me, in a moral and legal sense?

When I added MediaNet 4MB (unlimited for one month) via the web, it was
canceled, because you can't have MediaBasic and MediaNet on the same
account. I wound up with a $107 bill the first month for excessive data.
That was reversed with a phone call to Customer Service.

Where does that leave me, in a moral and legal sense?

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5

David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:

> On a related subject ... . What about PDA/smart phones? If you have a
> Treo 650, can you use it with Media Net--again, unsupported?

PDA is specifically mentioned on the "legal" page:
<http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>
"MEdia Net packages are not available on PDAs, RIM devices, or PC card
modems. MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. "

There is a separate PDA-connect plan for $44.99
http://www.cingular.com/sbusiness/data_connect

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5

David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I thought the 19.99 package, which I had for a month or two, included
> unlimited data use. I assume that if they terminate it, for tethering or
> other reasons, they have to tell you.

Cingular doesn't seem to "tell" you anything.
I have had plans changed with no notice. The voicemail has disappeared
from one of my phones a couple of times. I had MediaNet canceled twice,
both without notice. One I caught because of the $107 bill, the other I
happened to notice in looking at my data usage.

In neither case did it seem to have anything to do with excess usage.
There were external reasons for the change. It seems like asking for any
feature to be added or changed on any phone line makes it open season to
revert everything back to basic on all lines, or add and subtract packages
for no apparent reason. I have had text messaging and internet access
pay-as-you go enabled and disabled magically, and international dialing and
roaming. All of these seem to be time-associated with some call or
activity on my part, just inadvertent by their staff, or system interface.
I gather that it is the system interface.

I have taken to printing the features page occasionally. Just before and
just after the end of the billing period seems like a good idea, using a
virtual pdf printer. Then I save those, with time notations.

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
wrote:

> David Friedman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I'm more interested in the moral issue than the legal issue.
>
> > So if Cingular says "we are selling you this service on condition that
> > you don't use it for tethering," I have a serious problem with using the
> > service for tethering.
>
> I walked in to the Cingular store, and asked which phones would allow me to
> tether my laptop to the internet. I was sold a Motorola v220, and a
> MediaBasic package. I wasn't given any instruction on how to tether, so I
> looked on the cingular page, and found tethering advice. I realized that
> MediaBasic didn't offer enough data per month, so I added MediaNet.
>
> Where does that leave me, in a moral and legal sense?

In the clear, unless at some point they tell you that they are no longer
willing to sell you the service on those terms.

> When I added MediaNet 4MB (unlimited for one month) via the web, it was
> canceled, because you can't have MediaBasic and MediaNet on the same
> account. I wound up with a $107 bill the first month for excessive data.
> That was reversed with a phone call to Customer Service.
>
> Where does that leave me, in a moral and legal sense?

Dealing with a firm that makes mistakes but is willing to admit it,
apparently.

--
Remove NOPSAM to email
www.daviddfriedman.com