Verizon Reserving Right to Throttle Data Speeds for Top 5% of Users

[mm1250]

your analogy only works if the rental company is paying for the gas. You can drive as many miles as you want. You just can't waste gas. They just don't want you lead footing at every stop light and doing 90 down the freeway.

That's why the carpool lane was invented. To show appreciation for those who are gas conservative. Is the goverment discriminating too?

No, in my analogy the rental company is NOT paying for gas. The rental company is offering Unlimited mileage rental car. Meaning you can drive as many miles as you want for no additional per mile fee compared to other rental car companies limited mileage restrictions.

Also, in my state, car poll lanes aren't in existence.

 

[iMaven]

Ummm, no. Android users use more data than iPhone users.

So this could impact them more.

But someone brought up a good point. It says they "MAY" throttle. Doesn't mean they "WILL". And if you're in that top 5% then you're using way more resources than the other 95% and should be throttled any ways. It's not like there's unlimited spectrum and VZW has a network reputation to defend.

I think this will impact smartphones and MiFi's that use flash because it's a bandwidth hog...which is probably why Verizon mentions using H.264. iPhones don't use a lot of bandwidth unless you have a hotspot connected to 5 computers and they're all accessing flash games or tons of other data. I also think some people use the hotspot for home internet instead of going through an ISP. I don't think this will affect the regular everyday user which most people will fall into.

Interesting how Verizon is indirectly coming against Flash and recommending H.264 because it's more efficient.

 

[FearlessFreep]

This is why it doesn't matter if Verizon throttles or not. I'm essentially throttled on AT&T by very nature of their network anyway... what's the difference? At least I'll actually get to make or receive a call now.

I dislike the traffic shaping end of this, but if throttling the offenders allows me consistent coverage, then so be it.

 

[Hurda]

Interesting how Verizon is indirectly coming against Flash and recommending H.264 because it's more efficient.

"Lalala, look at me being totally ignorant towards modern video-streaming, as I don't know that next to every Flash-delivered video is encoded in H264 anyway, lalalalala."

 

[tritonj]

I don't think Verizon can get away with that. It can be legally argued that by consciously reducing the speed they are indirectly reducing your usage. Given that there are only a fixed number of hours/minutes/seconds in a month, Verizon can exactly tell how much data you can use in that period of time if you were continuously using data at a speed determined by them. Unlimited is unlimited period. You get to use as much bandwidth as the network allows at any point in time. It is like the rental car company saying unlimited mileage and fixing your rental car to run at a max speed of 25 Mph. Would that be acceptable? How much mileage can you put on the car in a day at 25mph max speed? If that is not acceptable then why is this Verizon stand any different?

that wouldn't be acceptable because they are probably causing you to break a traffic law somewhere, so if you're going to try to make an analogy at least make a good one

There isn't a case law that I know of, however, if someone is providing unlimited data to 2 users, and intentionally throttles 1 user's access speeds, this is considered discriminating against that 1 user. There are many case laws that you can find against that. I'd have to check more on the ISP side to see any cases of unlimited data service being intentionally throttled.

i am not a lawyer, so someone who is, or with a legal background please cinfirm this, but believe there is a list of criteria that must be met because something is considered to be discrimiation in the eyes of the law , just as an example here is teh definition of discrimination in Seattle, WSH, i'm sure most other laws of this type read the same way

Illegal discrimination is when:

*

You are treated differently from others in a similar situation; and
*

You are harmed by the treatment; and
*

You are treated this way because of your membership in a protected class (i.e., race, gender, etc.)
or -
*

Your request for a reasonable accommodation due to a disability is refused without a valid business reason.

 

[goosnarrggh]

I'm sorry but legally Verizon is in the WRONG here. If your going to provide unlimited data you can't discriminate by throttling the users who use to much data vs. other users who don't. If they can't properly manage unlimited use equally to all customers, they need to do a limited based plan then.

As long as they make the speed cap known before the customer signs the contract (or if they impose the cap after the contract is already signed, as long as they provide the customer with an opportunity to cancel the contract before the change takes effect), then LEGALLY, they aren't doing anything wrong.

Given that there are only a fixed number of hours/minutes/seconds in a month, Verizon can exactly tell how much data you can use in that period of time if you were continuously using data at a speed determined by them. Unlimited is unlimited period.

By that definition, it is logically impossible for any carrier to advertise truly "unlimited" usage. Every physical network has a theoretical maximum speed it can support, and if you multiply that theoretical maximum by the number of seconds in a billing period, you'll come up with a "limit" to the amount of data you can consume in a month. And in reality, no carrier could guarantee even that much data, unless they had a dedicated cell tower for each and every customer.

In that sense, every data plan is already "limited", regardless of whether or not the word "unlimited" appears in its title.

As long as Verizon has included a definition of the actual conditions they'll use to impose the throttling, and they state that the data plan is subject to those conditions, they can redefine "unlimited" to mean whathever they want.

 

[citi]

No, in my analogy the rental company is NOT paying for gas. The rental company is offering Unlimited mileage rental car. Meaning you can drive as many miles as you want for no additional per mile fee compared to other rental car companies limited mileage restrictions.

Also, in my state, car poll lanes aren't in existence.

yeah...that's my point. They aren't saying you can't drive unlimited mileage, which by the way, is the only thing actually guaranteed in your contract. You can't separate out the two. You can't have milieage without some form of speed or you wouldn't go anywhere..

 

[tritonj]

the only real argument that can be made here is that Verizon is offering limited data under the guise of unlimited data by virtue of the throttling, so you can argue false advertising or bait and switch, but even then they covered themselves by letting everyone know up front so all you can really do is not sign up with them and if you do you already know up front what you are getting into

 

[Tailpike1153]

I've been using an iPod Touch tethered to a Wi-Fi enabled phone on Verizon before they finally released the iPhone. Trust me when I say I've been using the iPod almost exclusively while the cell phone was relegated to being a glorified Mi-Fi card. My data for last month never breached 50MB, and usually I never use more than 300MB a month. And this with the occasional streaming of radio and uploading photos in their original sizes wirelessly through my camera (I use an Eye-Fi card) too.

I can't imagine iPhone users hitting the top 5% unless they were being stupid ridiculous. My rule of thumb is that as long as you try to limit your data usage to 5GB a month, I'm convinced you'll never be throttled. Even though I have unlimited, I don't expect this to last, so disciplining myself not to go overboard now with data usage is seen as good practice for the future.

I should note that this also includes those times when I've tethered my MacBook to my cell phone to surf the Internet via Verizon. Even watched a couple of Hulu shows without issue. *knock on wood*

Found 1. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1082690/

 

[bella92108]

Why are people so stupid? It's perfectly legal for Verizon to enter a contract with a term "We reserve the right to throttle or disable the internet when it rains in your city" .... that's not discrimination or illegal. If they added the term mid-contract and you didn't agree or opt-out\cancel, then it would not be a legal contract, but just because you don't LIKE the terms of a contract doesn't make it legal. We all have choices to make, and one choice is to enter into a contract that has terms we don't like. And you can't agree to the terms then act like they're discriminating against you when they take action under the terms that you signed your name to.

If you don't want to comply with their terms, don't sign up for Verizon. There are plenty of alternative carriers and devices. If you sign then say the term is invalid you're uneducated. But hey, America is full of idiots who signed 5 year ARMs and now are in foreclosure because they CHOSE to turn a blind eye to the black and white print. Funny how people ignore the voice saying "don't do it" when they want something, then complain they were victims of predatory contracts after the fact.

Redonkalous! lol

 

[Mr Fusion]

Verizon Reserving Right to Throttle Data Speeds for Top 5% of Users

... And I reserve my right to not purchase a Verizon iPhone.

There. Problem solved!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Watch how this clause has NO IMPACT on sales. If it was really that bad, people need to speak with their wallets rather than their mouths.

But like so many things in life, this too will pass with a collective groan before the public willingly takes another one up the a$$.

 

[thecypher]

that wouldn't be acceptable because they are probably causing you to break a traffic law somewhere, so if you're going to try to make an analogy at least make a good one

What traffic law are you talking about? Minimum speed limit? You are missing the point. Whether I said max speed of 25 mph or 45 mph the point is the rental car company is limiting how much you can drive in a 24 hour period. Then it is not unlimited mileage period. There is no two ways about it. If it is truly unlimited mileage then the only thing limiting you should be the speed *YOU* choose to drive at and of course environmental factors (how busy or packed the roads are and the max allowed legal speed limit). But the environmental factors are the same for all whether you are renting from Avis or Hertz.

 

[JRoDDz]

I reserve the right to throttle my monthly payment in direct relation to Verizon's throttling of my data.

I say a throttled data connection is worth say $3.00 a month?

 

[tritonj]

What traffic law are you talking about? Minimum speed limit? You are missing the point. Whether I said max speed of 25 mph or 45 mph the point is the rental car company is limiting how much you can drive in a 24 hour period. Then it is not unlimited mileage period. There is no two ways about it. If it is truly unlimited mileage then the only thing limiting you should be the speed *YOU* choose to drive at and of course environmental factors (how busy or packed the roads are and the max allowed legal speed limit). But the environmental factors are the same for all whether you are renting from Avis or Hertz.

like someone else has already said, if they tell you up front the car will only go this fast then it isn't an issue, so try again

I reserve the right to throttle my monthly payment in direct relation to Verizon's throttling of my data.

I say a throttled data connection is worth say $3.00 a month?

and that is your right, but Verizon won't agree to that stipulation and as such you will not have an agreement with them

and guess what you can do the same thing, don't agree to the terms or throttled data and you won't have an contract with Verizon either

it's a 2 way street, no one is forcing you to sign with Verizon, you don't like it don't buy it or sign it as the case may be

 

[Burger King]

I don't think Verizon can get away with that. It can be legally argued that by consciously reducing the speed they are indirectly reducing your usage. Given that there are only a fixed number of hours/minutes/seconds in a month, Verizon can exactly tell how much data you can use in that period of time if you were continuously using data at a speed determined by them. Unlimited is unlimited period. You get to use as much bandwidth as the network allows at any point in time. It is like the rental car company saying unlimited mileage and fixing your rental car to run at a max speed of 25 Mph. Would that be acceptable? How much mileage can you put on the car in a day at 25mph max speed? If that is not acceptable then why is this Verizon stand any different?

The question is did the person accept the TOS of the new unlimited plan when signing up for the new service. If the answer is Yes then Verizon would be legally covered. Not so sure how V would fare if the data hog was on the old unlimited plan without the new TOS in place.

 

[thecypher]

Why are people so stupid? It's perfectly legal for Verizon to enter a contract with a term "We reserve the right to throttle or disable the internet when it rains in your city" .... that's not discrimination or illegal. If they added the term mid-contract and you didn't agree or opt-out\cancel, then it would not be a legal contract, but just because you don't LIKE the terms of a contract doesn't make it legal. We all have choices to make, and one choice is to enter into a contract that has terms we don't like. And you can't agree to the terms then act like they're discriminating against you when they take action under the terms that you signed your name to.

If you don't want to comply with their terms, don't sign up for Verizon. There are plenty of alternative carriers and devices. If you sign then say the term is invalid you're uneducated. But hey, America is full of idiots who signed 5 year ARMs and now are in foreclosure because they CHOSE to turn a blind eye to the black and white print. Funny how people ignore the voice saying "don't do it" when they want something, then complain they were victims of predatory contracts after the fact.

Redonkalous! lol

I dont think the issue is with Verizon saying they will throttle your internet when it rains in your city. They are allowed to do that. The issue is Verizon telling you that you have unlimited data download and then capping your download by limiting your speed. The issue is Verizon saying Joe, Sam and Mark will have their speed throttled when it rains in your city while Jack and Jill are not throttled.

 

[bella92108]

... And I reserve my right to not purchase a Verizon iPhone.

There. Problem solved!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Watch how this clause has NO IMPACT on sales. If it was really that bad, people need to speak with their wallets rather than their mouths.

But like so many things in life, this too will pass with a collective groan before the public willingly takes another one up the a$$.

+1000! Spot-on comments.

 

[DiamondMac]

And one day they will explain the difference between GB with a capital 'B' (Gigabyte) and Gb with a lowercase 'b' (Gigabit) and tell you that you only get two Gb instead of two GB.

Maybe so, I frankly couldn't care less.

Most who are even slightly intelligent understood what I said.

 

[dave420]

Hell if you cross 5 gigs in a month you are abusing the system.

So if I watch Netflix on my phone I am abusing the system? I'm glad you are not in charge.

 

[tritonj]

I dont think the issue is with Verizon saying they will throttle your internet when it rains in your city. They are allowed to do that. The issue is Verizon telling you that you have unlimited data download and then capping your download by limiting your speed. The issue is Verizon saying Joe, Sam and Mark will have their speed throttled when it rains in your city while Jack and Jill are not throttled.

they aren't doing that after the fact though, they are telling you that up front before you sign up. and for anyone who has already sign up and the are adding this they allow those people out of their contracts, and have done so in the past, this is really a non issue.

all that is is going on is people who hate verizon, and those who want to move to verizon whining on a forum about terms that they don't like, if you don't like it then don't sign up, it is simple.

this is not a question of legality

 

[DiamondMac]

So if I watch Netflix on my phone I am abusing the system? I'm glad you are not in charge.

How absolutely pathetic is that?

5gb is abusing? My god, how brainwashed are some people where such low level of data is now considered "abuse"

 

[iStudentUK]

i am not a lawyer, so someone who is, or with a legal background please cinfirm this, but believe there is a list of criteria that must be met because something is considered to be discrimiation in the eyes of the law , just as an example here is teh definition of discrimination in Seattle, WSH, i'm sure most other laws of this type read the same way

Illegal discrimination is when:

*

You are treated differently from others in a similar situation; and
*

You are harmed by the treatment; and
*

You are treated this way because of your membership in a protected class (i.e., race, gender, etc.)
or -
*

Your request for a reasonable accommodation due to a disability is refused without a valid business reason.

I am not a lawyer, and I am not American. I have only studied 6 months of UK law so far, but no. Just no. This will not meet the requirements for discrimination as set out above. There is no protected class here, just someone who uses a lot of data. People aren't being discriminated against due to race, sex or anything like that.

To those complaining about how this is not 'unlimited'- read the terms and conditions. I haven't (obviously not on Verizon) but I am sure it will qualify 'unlimited' in some way, and there will be a provision for reducing/limiting service if your activities have an effect on the mobile network.

There are plenty of examples of 'unlimited' situations. Amazon Prime comes to mind, they advertise unlimited next day delivery- but you think that means you can order 1000 items everyday for a year? No- check the T&Cs, they will place qualifiers.

Verizon have done nothing wrong. I know people always tick the "I have read the T&Cs box" without reading it (I do too normally) but on something as important and expensive as a mobile contract you really should. I read mine before I purchasing and it has come in very handy.

 

[thecypher]

So if I watch Netflix on my phone I am abusing the system? I'm glad you are not in charge.

5 Gigs?? I think you are watching something more than Netflix ;-) Therefore you are "throttled"!!

 

[kingzts]

wait does this apply to the grandfathered contracts?

 

[tritonj]

I am not a lawyer, and I am not American. I have only studied 6 months of UK law so far, but no. Just no. This will not meet the requirements for discrimination as set out above. There is no protected class here, just someone who uses a lot of data. People aren't being discriminated against due to race, sex or anything like that.

To those complaining about how this is not 'unlimited'- read the terms and conditions. I haven't (obviously not on Verizon) but I am sure it will qualify 'unlimited' in some way, and there will be a provision for reducing/limiting service if your activities have an effect on the mobile network.

There are plenty of examples of 'unlimited' situations. Amazon Prime comes to mind, they advertise unlimited next day delivery- but you think that means you can order 1000 items everyday for a year? No- check the T&Cs, they will place qualifiers.

Verizon have done nothing wrong. I know people always tick the "I have read the T&Cs box" without reading it (I do too normally) but on something as important and expensive as a mobile contract you really should. I read mine before I purchasing and it has come in very handy.

thanks for he confirmation i wasn't completely off my rocker in thinking this wasn't discrimination

wait does this apply to the grandfathered contracts?

pretty sure it does, and for those still under a contract they will probably be given the opportunity to void the contract and leave, and for those who are month to month well they can just leave if they don't like it