AT&T to Face Net Neutrality Complaint Regarding FaceTime Over Cellular Limitation

[Akuratyde]

You whiners need to get over it. AT&T is a business and therefore it makes business decisions. When AT&T offered unlimited data, devices simply didn't use that much, they were slow, apps were slow, steaming movies and videos through cellular technology wasn't quite here yet, etc.

Now data consumption has gone through the roof and AT&T has to manage their costs. You are bunch of entitled babies that expect businesses to operate at a loss to give you the service you think you deserve. You are lucky they didn't strip away your unlimited data already. Businesses are NOT in business for the good of humanity. They are here to make a profit. They make a profit by providing goods or services at a price where we can FREELY choose to trade our hard earned dollars for that service. If you don't like the service they provide, STOP freely CHOOSING to trade your dollars for their service. It's as simple as that.

You are incorrect sir.

AT&T sells a service, that service is data. Customers should be free to do what they want with that data. If that includes making Facetime calls over 3G/4G that is their choice. They are paying for the data and they get to choose how they use it. If they go over their allotted amount, they pay overage charges. It's as simple as that.

Businesses are in the business of making money, but they still have ethical obligations. Trying to restrict the way someone uses a service they are paying for isn't ethical and that is why people are complaining.

 

[macrumorschamp]

Legally, it's going to be a hard sell.

Net Neutrality rules state that they can't block a competing product or service. AT&T don't have a competing product, so they are allowed to limit an application or service.

I think it will be an easy sell. They aren't blocking any other video chat applications allowed over 3G. It doesn't have to be an application AT&T makes as they are a cellular provider, not a software developer of a specific category of video chat service. This also goes into arguments of Android devices which offer similar applications and services and aren't being blocked (AND apparently have a large market share ATM). Same argument will always come back. Data is data. PERIOD! lol

 

[stephanieag88]

I totally wouldn't mind, if they weren't making mins unlimited with the stupid mobile share plan. I just want my regular voice plan that I have, because I get a 25% discount with my company, and I wouldn't have mind just a data share plan, with better prices. I have 4 iPhones on my account... I pay $100 just for data right now... everyone has a 2GB data service of the 4 iPhones..! AT&T!!! GREEDY BASTARDS!!!

 

[S.B.G]

well huge companies like att will lose business .

Maybe, maybe not. AT&T sold a record amount of iPhones this weekend, so people aren't all leaving for VZW or Sprint.

 

[KTF]

I am happy with AT&T and never had a complaint, but that is a crappy move on their part. It's our data to do with it what we please.

same here, block facetime is wrong.

 

[macrumorschamp]

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120911-712699.html

I understand what you mean...

I just saw it as more users using more data = slower network...

True, however, there are a lot of LTE phone currently out there and 1 out of every 2 new phones being produced will have LTE or HSDPA+ and so on. If it doesn't come from iPhone usage, it will be from Android and so on. The fact is, that data usage would happen regardless. It's an inevitable outcome of technological progress and the slow growth of the infrastructure. Another fact remains that AT&T and other carriers have been sitting on their laurels cashing in on outdated technology for over a decade. We are close to a decade behind in cellular technology compared to those overseas. As a fact, my friend John lived in Japan and in 2001 he had a popular cellphone which had video chat over the cellular data network then which I witnessed him using with several people in the city. Even the UK was doing this with Sony Ericsson phones almost that long ago. We believe what we're told with no proof. AT&T even refused to divulge the facts on "more bars in more places" and several lawsuits ended in failure. For some reason, those facts were held back due to national security. Makes no sense, but there it is. If you can't provide evidence of the usage, how can you make these statements without being called on false advertising? I don't understand how they continue to get away with these things.

 

[omyard]

You whiners need to get over it. AT&T is a business and therefore it makes business decisions. When AT&T offered unlimited data, devices simply didn't use that much, they were slow, apps were slow, steaming movies and videos through cellular technology wasn't quite here yet, etc.

Now data consumption has gone through the roof and AT&T has to manage their costs. You are bunch of entitled babies that expect businesses to operate at a loss to give you the service you think you deserve. You are lucky they didn't strip away your unlimited data already. Businesses are NOT in business for the good of humanity. They are here to make a profit. They make a profit by providing goods or services at a price where we can FREELY choose to trade our hard earned dollars for that service. If you don't like the service they provide, STOP freely CHOOSING to trade your dollars for their service. It's as simple as that.

Just because AT&T sells me data doesn't mean they should be able to tell me how to use it. Limit the amount of data I can use? Ok. Charge me extra or suspend my service after I use a set amount? Ok, I can live with those too.

The power company doesn't tell me how to use the electricity it sells me. Comcast doesn't tell me how to use the bandwidth it sells me. The water company doesn't tell me how to use the water it sells me. Dodge doesn't tell me how to drive the car it sold me.

So why should AT&T be able to tell me how to use the data it sells me?

 

[pkirby]

Really so Verizon forcing you into shared data to get a phone upgrade or a new plan even when you only have one device is better?

 

[tacobandit]

Don't know how it can hurt their revenue, they don't have a competing product. They don't offer video calling services.
If you're saying that people will use FaceTime rather than making a call, the amount will be tiny. I'd say that FaceTime is one of the least used features in iOS for most people.

What you say may be true, and it may not. What you have is a situation where a preinstalled capability that you don't need to set up and coordinate with other iphone users to use with them, supports voice over ip. The video element, and the real world usage is not what worries AT&T - it's the fact that the phone circumvents their business model, which is to charge for "voice" and data separately. Voice is in quotes because it's actually data too, it's just not internet data. Facetime is a disruptive technology. AT&T and verizon have both answered with their "share" plans. They've CHANGED their business models without hurting their revenues to the best of their ability. Before voice and text was front and center, now data is front and center, all while still charging u as much or more than what you would pay under the old model... It's entirely transparent and clear what AT&T is thinking. And it's not maliciousness or theft or an intentional violation of net neutrality. If AT&T is your enemy, KNOW YOUR ENEMY. Think like them.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Really so Verizon forcing you into shared data to get a phone upgrade or a new plan even when you only have one device is better?

Exactly.

 

[urbanslaughter1997]

Your contract was for 2 years, right? Yes.
Are you still within that 2-year term? No.
They've allowed you to keep that plan *beyond* the 2-year term, right? Yes.
Is there any legal or contractual requirement for them to *continue* to allow this? No.

If they stopped allowing 'grandfathered' unlimited plans (like Verizon did), they'd be fully within their rights.

That's how contracts work. A 2-year contract doesn't obligate *anyone* to do *anything* past the end of it's 2-year term.

Remember that part of your contracts class where they discussed "opportunity costs?" (no?) That's what it's called when I sign a contract with AT&T which prevents me from signing a contract with a competitor who might have continued my unlimited data. So yes, a 2 year contract does sometimes create obligations beyond its terms.

 

[koban4max]

sorry I read it wrong... =)

it's cool.

 

[Maven1975]

If AT&T is allowed to squash FaceTime over cellular, what's to keep them from coming for iMessage next?

Well put.

This is the case in a nutshell.

Straight Talk is looking better at this point.

Just checked the Sprint site out and it reads in big bold letters "NO THROTTLING" . Then below in tiny print it reads they reserve the right to throttle. GAMES!

 

[cparktd]

Since you have chosen to criticize my nation, let me "school" you a little. I signed a contract with AT&T in which they promised that they would give me all the data that I wanted if I would pay them $30. I have kept my end of the contract. Then AT&T said "Oh, we didn't think about the fact that technology would increase the amount of data that people would use. We would don't want to keep our end of the agreement." They knew that if the forced you off the contract they would get sued, so they tried things like, "if you make any change to your plan you lose your unlimited" or, throttling which I believe is illegal. Imagine what would have happened if I said "hey, when I agreed to $30 a month I didn't realize that I was going to lose my job, so I only want to pay you $10. I have a contract with AT&T. I have kept my end. They keep trying to change the rules because they made a ****** bargain. I know this is off topic a little, but please take your condescending foreign attitude and piss off.

Yes you entered into a contract with AT&T as did I. But not a lifetime one! More likely for two years. After that, no more contract, and they are free to amend their offering as they see fit. Take it or leave it. I can understand that.
However they should not be able to change the rules mid term.
Like any other contract entered into, AT&T took the risk for the duration. Failure to fulfill should be subject to legal recourse.
My contract is up so I'll take what I can get from whoever works best for me now... like it or not.

 

[Maven1975]

Remember that part of your contracts class where they discussed "opportunity costs?" (no?) That's what it's called when I sign a contract with AT&T which prevents me from signing a contract with a competitor who might have continued my unlimited data. So yes, a 2 year contract does sometimes create obligations beyond its terms.

Very true.

Didn't Sprint kick a buch of "Offenders" off their network a few years back? If AT&T continually had to throttle specific users, I would suspect that would give them grounds to terminate said relationship off contract.

Whats stopping them? Greed and competition. They would rather use these users as case points.

 

[Macboy Pro]

Hope AT&T either changes their choice, or pays for it! Greed at it's finest!

Here is a little educational photo on greed at its FINEST!

If you don't want the AT&T services you don't have to buy them. If you don't want to pay $29 for this Apple 20cent adapter, you have to buy a new on .30cent cable marked up to $39.

 

[truettray]

If they lose, they'll probably pass the cost onto us, like always. AT&T continues to pass these intolerable acts, and that didn't work out too well for the British.

FaceTime over data is not an unalienable right. I agree that data is data and we should be able to use it however we want... but we have Skype! I've been Skyping over Cellular Data for a year now, and it works just fine. This isn't the great oppression of 2012.

 

[xpected_one]

I'm not backing AT&T up or anything... they're the only service provider that catches at my house...

It works both ways... trying imagine what our data speeds would be like if they did allow facetime over cellular? talk about bogging down the network it be pointless to facetime being all choppy and lagging...

But see here is the problem, they are not stopping you from using FT over cellular. They want you to switch to a shared data plan. So if I am on a solo plan with a 3gb cap before being charged why must I switch to a shared plan? Who am I to share with? And even those of us on the unlimited plan if we are going to get edge speeds after a certain gb cap, it wouldn't be fast enough for FaceTime anyways.

 

[Maven1975]

Here is a little educational photo on greed at its FINEST!

If you don't want the AT&T services you don't have to buy them. If you don't want to pay $29 for this Apple 20cent adapter, you have to buy a new on .30cent cable marked up to $39.

This would be true if the iPhone worked on all networks without variation.

The adapters are not required for the "Phone" to function. The tied device carrier is.

 

[seang7]

How many people actually use all of their data? Almost nobody!! AT&T has been making money off of us for too long! All that extra data is ours!! And yet we get stuck every month paying for stay we don't use! If we have a unlimited plan, as I do, it's not even truly unlimited. AT&T starts throttling speeds when you hit a certain # of GBs. Again we pay for unlimited, but AT&T does not truly give us unlimited data. Now we won't be able to FaceTime over 3G or LTE? When almost no cities support true LTE, not HSPA. Maybe we need to get smart and sue AT&T for using words like UNLIMITED and not delivering! Or words like NATIONWIDE LTE, and truly not being Nationwide. I don't think nationwide should be defined as a couple cities across the nation. Or unlimited till we decide to throttle your data speeds. This needs to change! This is not politics! This is technology!!

 

[djstile]

The real issue here is that AT&T needs to upgrade their equipment - period. They are consistently trying to sell more and more phones and have people sign more and more contracts without upgrading anything on their end. I understand it's a business, but just like the customer is required to pay for service and maintain their contract in good standing for its duration; AT&T is required to PROVIDE the service the customer is paying for and to UPGRADE their equipment to provide that service at an equal or higher level for the duration of said contract. The bottom line here is AT&T wants everyone off of their unlimited plans, but won't take them away completely because that is one of the only things keeping people on AT&T.

AT&T ALWAYS lagging behind Verizon Wireless and now that the iPhone 5 is LTE compatible, people in areas that have Verizon LTE (which is MUCH more likely than living in an area with AT&T LTE) like myself, will be leaving AT&T in droves.

 

[highdefw]

I've been happy with AT&T until now. If other carriers can provide Facetime with no strings attached, why the hell can't AT&T? And true, I would have easily jumped ship to Verizon or Spring if it wasn't for my unlimited plan...

I hope AT&T loses this...

 

[holmesf]

FaceTime over data is not an unalienable right. I agree that data is data and we should be able to use it however we want... but we have Skype! I've been Skyping over Cellular Data for a year now, and it works just fine. This isn't the great oppression of 2012.

And when AT&T decides that Skype won't be available over cellular by applying the exact same logic to non-bundled apps (or if Skype were to become a bundled app)? Do you really think AT&T won't push this as far as they are allowed to?

Allowing data providers control over what services you can use poses a great threat to competition and freedom of speech. This is the point of Net Neutrality as a principle. The concept should be defended in every case, whether you personally use the service or not, because each violation sets a precedent. I believe that we do need to assert it as a right, possibly by arguing that it falls under the protection of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

 

[kivancmuslu]

Having read a good portion of this thread, I really wonder how many percent of the people whining about AT&T's decision have unlimited data plans that they don't want to lose.

For me, I have 200 MB data plan, which I was about 20$ per month (if I remember correctly). So, in any case, though I love FaceTime, using it over cellular is out of option for me, so I do not really care about AT&T's decision.

I totally understand that people with unlimited data plans did pay (and have been paying) at some time for it and they do deserve it, however they have to understand ---as somebody else pointed out--- that cellular technology changed a lot from the day you got your plans. With LTE on the way and HD front camera, you could easily consume GBs of data over a 30-40 minute talk with FaceTime. At some point, somebody will need to pay for this and I really doubt that what you pay AT&T for your unlimited data plan really covers all those GBs.

Unlimited data plan no longer exists with most of the companies for a good reason, because the definition of unlimited really started to become scary. For a plan that does not exist anymore, you should either stick with it and use it limited (defined by AT&T) or switch to another plan that permits FaceTime calls and just pay for your cellular usage. If you don't want to pay anything extra, just use FaceTime over WiFi, nobody (except your Wifi provider) is asking anything for it.

I can definitely understand people who have limited (or shared) data plans not liking this decision, however again from AT&T's perspective, I think if they would say that they would only lock FaceTime for unlimited data plans, than that would create even a bigger response from people with unlimited data plans. That is why ---I believe--- they just created a new plan (considering data usage needs and the money they need to make profit) and decided that FaceTime over cellular will only be available for that plan. I really do not see a big problem here.

 

[dandy1117]

But see here is the problem, they are not stopping you from using FT over cellular. They want you to switch to a shared data plan. So if I am on a solo plan with a 3gb cap before being charged why must I switch to a shared plan? Who am I to share with? And even those of us on the unlimited plan if we are going to get edge speeds after a certain gb cap, it wouldn't be fast enough for FaceTime anyways.

It's shared data among your devices, not among people. So if you had a 3G/4G iPad, then you'd share the same bucket of data allocation between your phone and iPad. This will likely be cheaper and more convenient than turning on tethering (included on the mobile shared plan, btw) or pay for a separate data account for your tablet. To add an iPad to a shared mobile plan is $10 a month on AT&T.