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.
Class Action Against AT&T Re: MMS and Tethering not Enabled
- Thread starter DrWeevil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if you read my last post, you'd know that i said a class action lawsuit is useless. AT&T not having the feature ready at launch IS grounds to send customer complaints to both AT&T and Apple.
i really do love the blind fanboyism. i love my iphone, but seriously, you can't seriously think that AT&T hasn't screwed up here.
if you read my last post, you'd know that i said a class action lawsuit is useless. AT&T not having the feature ready at launch IS grounds to send customer complaints to both AT&T and Apple.
i really do love the blind fanboyism. i love my iphone, but seriously, you can't seriously think that AT&T hasn't screwed up here.
You said AT&T has no legs to stand on, and didn't say a lawsuit was useless. And I agree AT&T screwed up, but my point is that you cannot sue them for it.
if you read my last post, you'd know that i said a class action lawsuit is useless. AT&T not having the feature ready at launch IS grounds to send customer complaints to both AT&T and Apple.
i really do love the blind fanboyism. i love my iphone, but seriously, you can't seriously think that AT&T hasn't screwed up here.
THEY SCREWED UP! WE ALL KNOW THAT.
But now, ask yourself, why would ATT do this on purpose? They've angered thousands of customers, but what do they get out of this?
Exactly. Nothing. They're working on it, and while they should have had it to begin with, it's coming and I'm sure whichever ATT employees are responsible for this are getting absolutely grilled by their superiors.
like i said, a lawsuit is useless. but all of you acting like AT&T completely disregarding their customers by taking their time to provide a service that they've known would be featured in the software for 4-5 months just boggles my mind. AT&T did indeed screw up and their should be dissent. it should be vocalized too so AT&T knows that customers won't stand for their BS.
By the time a class action lawsuit gets going the features will be released
Agreed, well said.
next you will be wanting to sue for not having T9 texting
holy crap, you guys can't read. at no point did i endorse a lawsuit.
And that is why Rogers (and other networks I presume) offered tethering and MMS right as soon as it was available on the iPhone - we've been paying for it all along, and were just unable to use it on our device!
Obviously there is really no grounds for the lawsuit. You signed up for and have continued to pay for the contract. The device's capabilities (or lack thereof) have no effect on your contract, so there really is no case - although I am obviously not an expert.
Let's see: AT&T announced that MMS wouldn't be ready until late summer, the iPhone came out in June, you bought it anyway. So you signed a contract knowing that MMS would not be ready. I fail to see what a class-action lawsuit would do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action
I will give you credibility here. The old saying does go, "Takes one to know one."
you hit the nail on the head. i am an idiot for being dissatisfied that a feature that should be enabled right now, isn't. and for pointing out that a company who has a history of doing things like this has done it again.
I'm no expert, but from my understanding MMS involves AT&T's network capacity, while Verizon crippling bluetooth on devices did not (aside from costing them money by users being able to transfer their own ringtones and not buying from Verizon).
No one is "acting like AT&T completely disregarding their customers" (I assume there is supposed to be an "isn't" before the word AT&T.)
We are just saying you can't SUE.
Why stop at a lawsuit...?
Write to your local Senator! Write to President Obama! Call for a revolution!
-----
Seriously, I don't think enough has been said about this topic; please continue to create these oh so 'informative' threads.
/sarcasm
Write to your local Senator! Write to President Obama! Call for a revolution!
-----
Seriously, I don't think enough has been said about this topic; please continue to create these oh so 'informative' threads.
/sarcasm
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G (white): Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
You'd probably have a better chance of winning ...
faustfire said:
You'd probably have a better chance of winning ...
Hahaha...
i LOVE this forum!
FIRST: You are correct sir, I am not an attorney. Thus, my ingenious handle, DrWeevil. I'm a vet! (No, I was not in the military!)
SECOND: I got out of work waaaay too early today, and the weather was a lil crummy. People skip out on walkin their dogs to the vet when it's crummy out. I've had a bit of free time on my hands today. So I sat down to my laptop and thought of some Subject I could post here to see what nerves I could irritate. THEN, I had to give it some meat to fill in the message body... and that's when the Verizon case came to mind. OBVIOUSLY, nobody who has any sense about them (or value for time) would put up a suit. I doubt any class-action attorney with any sense would take the case. BUT, the US has a TON of people who have no sense about them whatsoever. So, I thought it might be funny to see what they do with their excessive idle time.
I came back from the gym about two hours after posting this and you guys already generated TWO PAGES of smack talk! AWESOME!!! hahahaha Now THAT is my free-time well spent! hahahahaha
THIRD: I'll admit that the Verizon case is not a perfect legal precedent. I know Jack about legal precedent. However, those of you who are arguing the disabling MMS is like getting an HDTV then suing Pioneer for not having the channels are skipping a few steps in your analogy.
Here, I wasn't saying Apple (the equivalent to Pioneer in AppleMark's analogy) was at fault. I am stating AT&T is to blame. His analogy might work better if Dish network sold him an unlimited HDTV package AND sold him a Pioneer HDTV, then disabled the TV from receiving HD programming.
While somebody out there is going to say, "You're NOT paying for MMS already," indeed many of us are. I am on a family messaging plan which does include unlimited MMS. I am already paying for it. Further, it requires ZERO "programming" on AT&T's end to "enable" the network with any new phone. This is a fact I've verified with my old college friends who now develop and test hardware for AT&T and T-Mobile. As I said in my initial post, they've actually already been using MMS on their iPhones on AT&T in the US for about 2 months now. Their network is already "programmed". AT&T has just disabled it on our units. THAT's where this is close to the Verizon suit.
Again, you are correct in saying that AT&T never advertised that the iPhone would be transmitting MMS, or at least not until the fall. WHERE THEY FAIL: THEY ARE CHARGING ME MONTHLY FOR MY PLAN THAT ALLOWS ANY PHONE I ACTIVATE ON THEIR NETWORK TO TRANSMIT UNLIMITED SMS AND MMS. UNTIL NOW, THEY WERE ABLE TO CLAIM THE iPHONE WAS INCAPABLE OF MMS. NOW, 1) THE PHONE IS CAPABLE, 2) THEIR NETWORK IS CAPABLE, yet they choose to disable the feature. Where Verizon was attacked for misrepresenting the new Motorola hardware unit, AT&T is misrepresenting their Unlimited Messaging plan.
In talking further with my friends just now, they tell me they unlocked their iPhones to work on any network, swapped out their SIMs, and Kah-BLAM... MMS was being transmitted on T-Mobile's network with their iPhones... NO ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING!!! . As the functionality is all already built around standard protocols, it rarely even a matter of a few porting issues... only needed if the phone was developed out-of-standards; though this hasn't been the case in years now. By no means is it something that would take months.
Lastly, as I said in the initial post, MMS is NOT disabled because of network bandwidth. If AT&T can **STREAM** TV, they can send MMS. Yes, this would assume then that they have additional bandwidth above and beyond their current tv-streaming capacity. My logical guess (NOT something i've verified) is that they do; else, how are they now able to add the capacity for a new ***pay-per-month*** service to STREAM navigational maps and traffic data, yet incapable of transmitting the MMS for which I have already paid?
FOURTH: Yeah, tethering is not a good example here cuz I haven't paid for an unlimited data plan that covers ad-on hardware; just covers the phone itself.
FIFTH: I'd have other things to say, but as much fun a time as you all have shown me, I'm now starting to feel guilty about not catching up on some real reading. I spent waaaaay too much time jerkin around today. I'll let y'all run with this new gift for a bit...
i LOVE this forum!
FIRST: You are correct sir, I am not an attorney. Thus, my ingenious handle, DrWeevil. I'm a vet! (No, I was not in the military!)
SECOND: I got out of work waaaay too early today, and the weather was a lil crummy. People skip out on walkin their dogs to the vet when it's crummy out. I've had a bit of free time on my hands today. So I sat down to my laptop and thought of some Subject I could post here to see what nerves I could irritate. THEN, I had to give it some meat to fill in the message body... and that's when the Verizon case came to mind. OBVIOUSLY, nobody who has any sense about them (or value for time) would put up a suit. I doubt any class-action attorney with any sense would take the case. BUT, the US has a TON of people who have no sense about them whatsoever. So, I thought it might be funny to see what they do with their excessive idle time.
I came back from the gym about two hours after posting this and you guys already generated TWO PAGES of smack talk! AWESOME!!!
hahahaha Now THAT is my free-time well spent! hahahahahaTHIRD: I'll admit that the Verizon case is not a perfect legal precedent. I know Jack about legal precedent. However, those of you who are arguing the disabling MMS is like getting an HDTV then suing Pioneer for not having the channels are skipping a few steps in your analogy.
Here, I wasn't saying Apple (the equivalent to Pioneer in AppleMark's analogy) was at fault. I am stating AT&T is to blame. His analogy might work better if Dish network sold him an unlimited HDTV package AND sold him a Pioneer HDTV, then disabled the TV from receiving HD programming.
While somebody out there is going to say, "You're NOT paying for MMS already," indeed many of us are. I am on a family messaging plan which does include unlimited MMS. I am already paying for it. Further, it requires ZERO "programming" on AT&T's end to "enable" the network with any new phone. This is a fact I've verified with my old college friends who now develop and test hardware for AT&T and T-Mobile. As I said in my initial post, they've actually already been using MMS on their iPhones on AT&T in the US for about 2 months now. Their network is already "programmed". AT&T has just disabled it on our units. THAT's where this is close to the Verizon suit.
Again, you are correct in saying that AT&T never advertised that the iPhone would be transmitting MMS, or at least not until the fall. WHERE THEY FAIL: THEY ARE CHARGING ME MONTHLY FOR MY PLAN THAT ALLOWS ANY PHONE I ACTIVATE ON THEIR NETWORK TO TRANSMIT UNLIMITED SMS AND MMS. UNTIL NOW, THEY WERE ABLE TO CLAIM THE iPHONE WAS INCAPABLE OF MMS. NOW, 1) THE PHONE IS CAPABLE, 2) THEIR NETWORK IS CAPABLE, yet they choose to disable the feature. Where Verizon was attacked for misrepresenting the new Motorola hardware unit, AT&T is misrepresenting their Unlimited Messaging plan.
In talking further with my friends just now, they tell me they unlocked their iPhones to work on any network, swapped out their SIMs, and Kah-BLAM... MMS was being transmitted on T-Mobile's network with their iPhones... NO ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING!!! . As the functionality is all already built around standard protocols, it rarely even a matter of a few porting issues... only needed if the phone was developed out-of-standards; though this hasn't been the case in years now. By no means is it something that would take months.
Lastly, as I said in the initial post, MMS is NOT disabled because of network bandwidth. If AT&T can **STREAM** TV, they can send MMS. Yes, this would assume then that they have additional bandwidth above and beyond their current tv-streaming capacity. My logical guess (NOT something i've verified) is that they do; else, how are they now able to add the capacity for a new ***pay-per-month*** service to STREAM navigational maps and traffic data, yet incapable of transmitting the MMS for which I have already paid?
FOURTH: Yeah, tethering is not a good example here cuz I haven't paid for an unlimited data plan that covers ad-on hardware; just covers the phone itself.
FIFTH: I'd have other things to say, but as much fun a time as you all have shown me, I'm now starting to feel guilty about not catching up on some real reading. I spent waaaaay too much time jerkin around today.
I'll let y'all run with this new gift for a bit...