Do you think tethering without a carrier tethering plan is immoral?

[Oohara]

Phone companies are greedy barstads, I don't feel bad about taking advantage of them in the slightest.

After a phone company calling up my senile grandmother and tricking her into a ridiculously expensive 2-year plan that she doesn't need nor can even use crowned by an absolute piece of **** 2 year old dumbphone (this after her being a loyal customer for 10+ years without cashing out on hardly any plan renewals), I will count every MB I tether on a no-tethering plan as righteous payback.

Telephony subscription costs are usually ridiculously overpriced anyway, I have no idea how people can even hesitate to take opportunity of something like this out of morality or ethics standpoints. In almost all other areas I'll abide by the rules and pay for what I take, but when it comes to these phone companies, seriously, just **** the man.

 

[b24pgg]

I don't believe so. FWIW this ruling was specifically for LTE phones. Something about the way Verizon acquired the 700mhz band. I am not certain, but I don't actually think it applies to any model of the iPhone based on that.

Correct. Only applies to VZW LTE tethering at this point.

 

[nickchallis92]

man am I glad i don't live under the restrictions of a US carrier

God save the Queen and her UK carriers who don't care about tethering

 

[Demonface]

It's not immoral and I think that the US FCC should force all companies to stop forcing the consumer into buy an additional play to tether. After all we are already paying the company money so why should we give them even more?

 

[JS82712]

My opinion is that since I have paid for the data I should be able to use it in any manner I choose, and the carrier is immoral for attempting to charge me extra for tethering/hotspot functionality.

I'm just curious how many others share this opinion.

EDIT (7/31/2012): Looks like the FCC agrees. Verizon can no longer force you to pay $20/month to tether: http://www.gizmodo.com/5930610/verizon-officially-cant-force-you-to-pay-20-for-tethering-anymore

In canada, if you have a data plan that's 1GB or more, you are able to tether for free. so no, carriers that charge extra for tethering are just money wh0res.

 

[jlblodgett]

I have never understood the phone companies' hang up on tethering.

If I pay $x a month for x GB of data - what difference does it make what I use that x GB of data for? Be it for internet or tethering or watching Netflix or whatever.

Seems just another way for the phone companies to fill their pockets.

 

[profets]

Yup, totally cool to pay to use data you've already paid for.

Tethering, and possibly FaceTime with ios6, I can't believe apple keeps building in hooks to allow carriers to control OS features.

 

[Jumpie]

And, the FCC just ruled today for VZW only that they can't block tethering apps or charge for using data because of it. And, they also can't cancel your service even if it's against their Terms. I just can't wait to see how this play out if/when the iPhone5 with VZW 4G LTE comes out.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/order-and-consent-decree-verizon-wireless-pay-125-million

 

[Mac.World]

And, the FCC just ruled today for VZW only that they can't block tethering apps or charge for using data because of it. And, they also can't cancel your service even if it's against their Terms. I just can't wait to see how this play out if/when the iPhone5 with VZW 4G LTE comes out.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/order-and-consent-decree-verizon-wireless-pay-125-million

This ruling only applied to Android phones, sinse these are the only phones capable of 4G/LTE, which is what the suit was referencing. What this should do is prevent any US carrier (including AT&T!) from forcing people to pay extra for tethering or auto subscribing customers that were tethering through jailbreaks.
Making you pay extra (to use data you've already paid for) shows just how bad the US Carriers are. Complete crooks, and I hope at&t gets hit with an FcC fine next!

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

I paid for 2GB of data. Why shouldn't I be able to use it however I want? I know the contracts say otherwise but that doesn't make it any different. Is it any different if my phone uses the data or I tether it to my MBP and have it use the data?

 

[pragmatous]

Maybe it's unethical for the carrier to ask a second time for the same exact plan but you can use it for your computer. By hacking your phone to allow yourself to use your existing plan is justice.

And Justice was served

Immoral?
I don't know about that
I think unethical might be a better word to use in this context

 

[JMG]

Thank you FCC for making the right decision based on common sense and logic. To those of you who disagreed that tethering should be free for those with non-unlimited plans... Well you know... you were wrong and told you so, and suck it etc... No real hate here, I'm half kidding honestly, but it feels good to be right.

 

[BornAgainMac]

I think it is wrong to charge extra for tethering but it is also wrong to get around the restriction illegally. It is best to just switch carriers if it is offered for free elsewhere if that is important to you.

 

[mlmwalt]

I'm just bummed it's for LTE only.

Actually, I'm not that bummed, CDMA is no good for tethering anyway even at its fastest.

BTW, if you don't like that a company is gouging you, become a shareholder. VZ pays a tidy little dividend.

 

[JMG]

I think it is wrong to charge extra for tethering but it is also wrong to get around the restriction illegally. It is best to just switch carriers if it is offered for free elsewhere if that is important to you.

It doesn't make sense to pay extra for tethering, so why would it be wrong to use data you have paid for? Even the courts agree. If anything, it was more illegal for them to charge for tethering. It was at least unfair. And in this case you KNOW that tethering on a limited plan is not stealing anyone's service or money.

 

[keystoneuser]

I think most of it falls on the fact that the companies rely on most people not using their allotted amount of data. So essentially they are cashing in on bandwidth not used, and you as the customer are paying for something you don't use.

And for the argument against those with unlimited plans, well they are unlimited, the game changed with a lot more data intensive apps and such, and they don't want the backlash from customers if they decided to get rid of it and force you on a tiered plan. Hence why they throttle after a certain amount. Their little comeback from that one of course is "We promised unlimited data, not speed."

Consumers don't group together well enough to fight against a company, unless it is an issue about gay marriage, etc.. so these practices continue.

And that was not necessarily a political comment, but just something I observed.