Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AT&T Cracking Down on Unauthorized Tethering

alandail said:
or they look at the data and detect the tethering that way. It's not that hard - if a page is being accessed from a desktop version of a web browser, the person is tethering.
Click to expand...
They may use data quantity as one red flag - that way they have less work on their plate - they focus on the "data hogs". I was not trying to imply that was their sole data usage. I have no doubt that they do something more in depth (like what you suggest) to target the actual users more. It's never going to be 100% - there will be some people who receive this in error - but AT&T just cannot legally use high data users as it's basis for these tethering charges. It would be discriminatory (since the unlimited data plan does not specify a limit), plus, as we have stated before, it would be inaccurate since people can legitimately use lots of data without tethering.

AT&T isn't run by idiots here, they don't want to risk the problems of a class action suit by falsely flagging tons of accounts - they are making sure that they are minimize false positives. Despite the fact that what they are doing is entirely proper (going after contract violators), they can't make too many mistakes or else they risk severe public backlash.

All of this "its based on high data usage" is pure guesswork since we don't know what goes on on AT&T's back-end. To say that it is based on one factor is just plane ignorance of network monitoring.
 
Since this has happened I have not read any more getting the notices,
Looks like At&t got the people they wanted to make examples of and scare others.

We have argued a lot
Ethics
Legal
Contract

I'm on the side that tethering should be free and the only thing that is charged for is data.

Also while I have unlimited Data I also think more then 10gb a month is abuse.

The true abusers are using 50 gb or more a month and many of those are not caught.

At&t has not clearly per the admissions here and elsewhere, caught or flagged high users and or all the non contracted tether people.

I think the flagging is over unless there is unusual amount of data use.......... :|
 
This is pretty stupid. I pay for the 2 GB a month, so I can use it how I wish. I just wonder if the only people being targeted are the ones with the unlimited data. But, something tells me that's not the case...
 
Howdr said:
Since this has happened I have not read any more getting the notices,
Click to expand...

That doen’t mean anything. AT&T doesn’t just target people who are apt to complain. Who knows how many people have gotten the message and ignored or just did the right thing.

Collin789 said:
This is pretty stupid. I pay for the 2 GB a month, so I can use it how I wish.
Click to expand...

Then why did you sign a contract with AT&T that agrees to the exact opposite of that?
 
pdjudd said:
Then why did you sign a contract with AT&T that agrees to the exact opposite of that?
Click to expand...
Because net neutrality rules are a joke and you'd have to be bass-ackwards to live without cell phone data these days?

He also signed a contract because it's legal to sell you a device (an iPhone), and then constrain you to a specific carrier.

My ethics argument runs completely counter to your legality argument.
 
Then why did you sign a contract with AT&T that agrees to the exact opposite of that?[/QUOTE]

All I'm really trying to say is that it's wrong that they have it set up that way...
Its the same thing with jailbreaking you iPhone. We all know now that it's legal now, but before, lots of people were thinking it was against the law...when really, you bought the phone, you do what you wish with it. This time it's "I pay for the data, I do what I want with it."
And yes I know I signed a contract with AT&T saying the opposite BUT I'm just saying its wrong...
 
pdjudd said:
That doen’t mean anything. AT&T doesn’t just target people who are apt to complain. Who knows how many people have gotten the message and ignored or just did the right thing.



Then why did you sign a contract with AT&T that agrees to the exact opposite of that?
Click to expand...


All I'm really trying to say is that it's wrong that they have it set up that way...
Its the same thing with jailbreaking you iPhone. We all know now that it's legal now, but before, lots of people were thinking it was against the law...when really, you bought the phone, you do what you wish with it. This time it's "I pay for the data, I do what I want with it."
And yes I know I signed a contract with AT&T saying the opposite BUT I'm just saying its wrong...
 
neko girl said:
Because net neutrality rules are a joke and you'd have to be bass-ackwards to live without cell phone data these days?
Click to expand...

I consider tethering to be a separate from net neutrality. AT&T isn’t blocking webisites, it’s restricting things on a different level. ISP’s do the same thing when they restrict people’s abilities to run certain server operations on a consumer plan. I have no problem with this. AT&T is selling internet access, not modem operability.

He also signed a contract because it's legal to sell you a device (an iPhone), and then constrain you to a specific carrier.
Click to expand...

That is true.

My ethics argument runs completely counter to your legality argument.
Click to expand...

My question was largely rhetorical. I don’t care about ethics. You cannot logically (in my book at least) claim you have a right to do something after you signed a contract saying that you won’t do it. Contracts are agreements after all. If you feel so strongly about your rights, why sign a contract that waives that right.

Personally, I agree with you to some degree. At least AT&T isn’t restricting traffic to any particular service here. Tethering I see as completely different since it is treating your data much differently than surfing to a website or streaming music over pandora or whatever. It is a service that I should pay for since I am changing the nature of the service. I prefer to focus my efforts on SMS fee’s which I consider to be a violation of NN (even though NN is not the law of the land). SMS costs the carriers zero, and it’s data that you get no matter what... It’s restricting a function native to the phone that is specific to the phone itself... Tethering is quite different - involves much more statistical data usage.
 
pdjudd said:
I consider tethering to be a separate from net neutrality. AT&T isn’t blocking webisites, it’s restricting things on a different level. ISP’s do the same thing when they restrict people’s abilities to run certain server operations on a consumer plan. I have no problem with this. AT&T is selling internet access, not modem operability.



That is true.



My question was largely rhetorical. I don’t care about ethics. You cannot logically (in my book at least) claim you have a right to do something after you signed a contract saying that you won’t do it. Contracts are agreements after all. If you feel so strongly about your rights, why sign a contract that waives that right.

Personally, I agree with you to some degree. At least AT&T isn’t restricting traffic to any particular service here. Tethering I see as completely different since it is treating your data much differently than surfing to a website or streaming music over pandora or whatever. It is a service that I should pay for since I am changing the nature of the service. I prefer to focus my efforts on SMS fee’s which I consider to be a violation of NN (even though NN is not the law of the land). SMS costs the carriers zero, and it’s data that you get no matter what... It’s restricting a function native to the phone that is specific to the phone itself... Tethering is quite different - involves much more statistical data usage.
Click to expand...

See if I was letting a bunch of random people use my AT&T data that would be a different story. But all I am doing when I'm tethering is taking my iPhone data and using it on my computer instead of using it on my iPhone...
 
pdjudd said:
I don’t care about ethics. You cannot logically (in my book at least) claim you have a right to do something after you signed a contract saying that you won’t do it. Contracts are agreements after all. If you feel so strongly about your rights, why sign a contract that waives that right.
Click to expand...
Contracts enforcing unethical laws do not (cannot) be tantamount to waiving rights. We have many examples in history where doing something by the letter of the law isn't the same as agreeing to its principles.

It is, as they say, fighting fire with fire.

I can't feel all that sorry for AT&T.
 
I wonder how many argue the tethering on At&t are on At&t themselves? I have read those people who are on T mobile

Per Apple you cannot use an IPhone on TMobile. To do so means you JB and unlock which is against Apple policy.

Apple would sue over this if they cared to it's just as wrong as breaking the tethering contract.

You see you can't say one thing is ok and another is not.

I guess I'm an old fashioned freedom fighter at heart.
I want to pay for things but have the freedom to use them.

I was one of the first of thousands who had wireless router at home that I shared home Internet when the providers said you could not.

I shared my cable within my home with 1 other tv back when we were not to.

This is no different just many of you are too young to know about the struggles we had in the past with stupid ideas to overcharge.

Paying extra for a "switch" to use the same data is another stupid money grubbing idea.

At&t owes us.

Without IPhone they would not have had 15 million customers out of 70 million, almost half of what they are getting with the T mobile deal.

The Internet was given to us for free but as expected it's becoming an expensive gift............
 
Word Warrior said:
According to Macworld Mainline http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?olo=email&NewsID=3267716 O2 in the UK are to allow tethering for free, although it doesn't make it clear if it's just for iPad/iPod or whether you can tether a laptop to your iPhone 4 too. Hope so! :)
Click to expand...

I think you can tether to whatever you want, but they are new tariffs you have to move to and for sopem folks (on the older unlimited) tariffs, it's not a great move as the new tariffs come with usage limits.
 
tariffs

Azzin said:
I think you can tether to whatever you want, but they are new tariffs you have to move to and for sopem folks (on the older unlimited) tariffs, it's not a great move as the new tariffs come with usage limits.
Click to expand...
I think the usage tariff came in with iphone 4 anyway and the way I read it they are increasing what I already have so could be good news. Mind you, I can't find reference on the O2 website yet. Just Macworld.

I wait with interest.
 
Word Warrior said:
I think the usage tariff came in with iphone 4 anyway and the way I read it they are increasing what I already have so could be good news. Mind you, I can't find reference on the O2 website yet. Just Macworld.

I wait with interest.
Click to expand...

The move from the legacy unlimited tariffs did come in with the iPhone4, yes.

The new SIM Only tariffs are here: http://www.o2.co.uk/tariffs/simplicity
 
Word Warrior said:
I'm still under contract and just gone to "My O2" the tethering bolt on is still with a price attached. Hopefully they'll announce it officially soon, it would be useful for me.
Click to expand...

I think you'll need to give up you unlimited data and get the the bolt on (with it's data allowance) to enable tethering.

I've read a fair few threads with people saying they will be worse off from a data perspective and a cost perspective changing tariffs just to get tethering.

Scroll down to see the tethering info: http://www.o2.co.uk/tariffs/paymonthly
 
Collin789 said:
See if I was letting a bunch of random people use my AT&T data that would be a different story. But all I am doing when I'm tethering is taking my iPhone data and using it on my computer instead of using it on my iPhone...
Click to expand...

there are a few problems with what you said.

1 - you signed a contract that said you can't do that

2 - you aren't just using one device instead of the other, you are using both of them at the same time. The whole time you are using the computer, the phone is doing things like accessing mail, accepting push notifications, etc.

3 - the bandwidth load of the computer is likely higher. A larger screen means any streamed video is likely higher resolution. It also means multiple apps that may access the web running simultaneously. Or even multiple pages open at once in a web browser. All of this adds to the peak bandwidth load AT&T has to support.

Everyone seems to completely miss this issue too. The load on the system to simultaneously handle multiple devices over a single connection is larger than a single device on the same connection. They're all doing stuff in the background in addition to whatever you're actively doing.
 
alandail said:
Everyone seems to completely miss this issue too. The load on the system to simultaneously handle multiple devices over a single connection is larger than a single device on the same connection. They're all doing stuff in the background in addition to whatever you're actively doing.
Click to expand...

This is just not true there is no extra load, I'm tired of this Myth.
It has not been proven,
It's just the argument At&t has and I have to tell you, The FCC better step in if the Largest Cell company can't handle less then 5% high use Internet. At&t will have 100 million users and want us to believe 300,000 scattered across the whole USA will eat all the bandwidth?

It's not true
If it is then At&t should be kept from buying TMobile
Lol
 
Howdr said:
This is just not true there is no extra load, I'm tired of this Myth.
It has not been proven,
It's just the argument At&t has and I have to tell you, The FCC better step in if the Largest Cell company can't handle less then 5% high use Internet. At&t will have 100 million users and want us to believe 300,000 scattered across the whole USA will eat all the bandwidth?

It's not true
If it is then At&t should be kept from buying TMobile
Lol
Click to expand...

I didn't even get that from AT&T. It's absolutely true that multiple devices put more load on the network than a single device does. Whoever said it eats all of the bandwidth? I certainly didn't. I said it adds extra load that isn't being paid for. That it's another reason beyond and separate from the monthly data limits that there is an extra charge to pay.

And where do you get your 300k number from. There certainly are a lot more than 300k smart phones capable of tethering out there.

Some people certainly go through great lengths to self-justify stealing. Do you steal software/music and self-justify it by saying it didn't cost the developer/singer anything because you weren't going to buy it anyway, then go ahead and use/listen to the product of their hard work as if you had paid for it?
 
I've got no axe to grind here either way as I'm in the UK and nowhere near a heavy data user (I have a 500Mb allowance on my iPhone 4 (Vodafone) and a 3 month/3 gig allowance SIM on my iPad (3).

Isn't the basic issue here that people who have unlimited tariffs from AT&T are unhappy that they could use (for example) 10 gig of data on their iPhones and be within the terms of the contract, yet aren't allowed to use that same 10 gig, by using 5 gig via the iPhone and another 5 gig via tethering?

FWIW, I think the issue is semantics and I kind of see it from both sides.

AT&T offer unlimited data (but no tethering) via the contract (and it was a contract that was agreed to by both AT&T and the customer), yet now that tethering has become more accessible don't want the customer to use that unlimited data by anything other than the iPhone?

What about those folks on Android handsets (that have pretty much always had a hotspot option), are they in the same boat?

I think it's a situation that needs a review to be honest because the landscape has changed due to tethering largely unheard of/used when theose contracts were signed.

O2 & T-Mobile in the Uk went through a similar situation in the UK by suddenly announcing that unlimited data was being removed for everyone, but then had to back down after a widespread round of bad PR online and agree that customers that had unlimited would keep it and anyone who signed up after "x" date would go on to the newer (not unlimited tariffs).

In the UK, if an mobile provider changes it's Ts & Cs (by removing unlimited data for example) then the customer has the right to terminate the contract without penalty.

This meant that people who had signed up for 18 month/2 year contracts and got a free/subsidised phone were allowed to leave and keep the phone!!

When O2 & T-Mob realised what a bad move this was, they backtracked and changed it to "new customers after x date".

I know it's not directly comparable, but perhaps AT&T should have considered something similar?

New customers from "x" date aren't allowed to tether, but existing customers (only those on unlimited tariffs) can?

I fall into the camp that unlimited should mean unlimited and AT&T shouldn't have any interest in how the data is being used, but I do get that a contract was entered into by people with unlimited data that didn't allow tethering.

As I say, I think it needs a review, as (as we say in the UK) the goalposts have moved, since those unlimited data tariff contracts were signed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back