http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/99655 Any one seen this yet? Check it out! He ordered sprint to reimburse!!! Will this work on iPhone 
:
:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
California judge rules early cell phone termination fees illegal
- Thread starter pranavss11
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
i personally don't like where this is going. without contract penalties, phone carriers have no incentive to subsidize phones. being a long-term at&t subscriber, i enjoy getting those subsidized phones every other year.
I think this will pretty much screw over customers if all early termination fees are cancelled.
If it forces them to change the price depending on how much time is left, though, then it's beneficial to people canceling near the end of their contracts.
If it forces them to change the price depending on how much time is left, though, then it's beneficial to people canceling near the end of their contracts.
This was posted a few days back, please do a search next time:
Thread Link
I am just surprised that this got ruled that way, the user agreed to the term with their contract, and this is what is really protecting the cell phone companies as to receiving payment that was agreed to. As much as it benefits the consumer, I disagree with this ruling as it hurts the cell phone companies and gives people a way of agreeing to a contract that was put in place to protect both sides, but now the contract isn't really a contract at all if the user can get out of it so easily. I can even see this going to the point where cell phone companies will give you the only option of canceling your contract by paying off the remaining months of service that are unused for full price (which in few cases could help, but if somebody has 2 or 3 months or more left on their contract, then it will hurt the consumer.
Thread Link
I am just surprised that this got ruled that way, the user agreed to the term with their contract, and this is what is really protecting the cell phone companies as to receiving payment that was agreed to. As much as it benefits the consumer, I disagree with this ruling as it hurts the cell phone companies and gives people a way of agreeing to a contract that was put in place to protect both sides, but now the contract isn't really a contract at all if the user can get out of it so easily. I can even see this going to the point where cell phone companies will give you the only option of canceling your contract by paying off the remaining months of service that are unused for full price (which in few cases could help, but if somebody has 2 or 3 months or more left on their contract, then it will hurt the consumer.
- Status