FYI the only company that has truly "unlimited" data is Sprint. So your choices of who to jump to are quite limited.

AT&T first stopped offering unlimited plans, then raised the cheapest texting plan from $5 to $20, then raised the cheapest data plan from $15 to $20, then raised the phone upgrade fee from $18 to $36.

Where I live, AT&T and Verizon are the only two options and having a doupoly is costing customers a lot of money.

It feels just like the old ma bell. I think the Department of Justice or FTC should split any telecom company with more than 25% share in any given market.

i got my first txt saying i was over the usage limit.

i was suprised so i looked at my usage, it was at 2.2 gig. the TOP 5% is now going to be over 2gig cause of the cap they have now.

so i have 2 options, stay with att and stay pissed, or go to verizion.

in my neck of the wood, Att has THE best coverage! I live in san antonio texas and i have friends that have sprint, they have 10 times the amount of dropped calls and never got calls than others have. i often travel to south texas and i can get data where sprint cant get a phone call, so sprint gets a no vote.

verizion.....

if they could charge you for the air in the store they would. i dont like verizion cause of their billing tactics, and they dont offer an unlimited plan either.

MAYBE t-mobile?

but i love my iphone and they dont have an iphone.

this is horse $h!t!!!!

i might just say screw it and go to sprint anyway!

the iphone 5 will be out and my contract is up in november, so they can stick it!

it will suck if anything happens when i am in the middle of nowhere and i cant get help tho!

DAMN!!

and i was actually happy with att till this happened!

and for that fool in the article saying "he looked at some pictures and emails" is full of crap!

i used 2 weeks straight of iheart radio to get that email, so a "few" pics and emails wont do it.

they need to check their apps that they have. i bet they are running in the back ground and he doesnt know it.

I feel sorry for Att. Clearly, they just don't have the infrastructure to be able to have as many customers as they do. Let's all commit ourselves to helping ATT in true Christian mode. Please, help them out by stopping your service and moving to a competitor that has infrastructure to enable them to have customers. This will make ATT very happy as once they're as small as they need to be, they'll be able to afford to have customers again. Thanks for helping out.

I've got Verizon from back when they were unlimited, and when my contract expires, I won't be renewing. I'll just keep the plan as is and do without the upgrade. Not like I need the newest and greatest phone anyway. If anything, I'll dump the smart phone and go back to a cheaper "dumb" phone.

here's something for free- just don't use it or we'll severely screw up your service...

Sounds like a good class-action suit in the making. And lawsuits related to criminal or fraudulent activity are specifically not covered by arbitration clauses. That was reaffirmed in the most recent Supreme case. This is clearly fraud and I think a Federal court would decide to take it.

READ the article: Unlimited data, even if you have been throttled, you still have unlimited DATA. nothing has ever been said about speed.

Welcome to the future people. You are only going to see more of this. Users didn't protest when AT&T and Verizon discontinued unlimited data packages. You are now stuck with data caps that these companies determine and they will develop 2 or 3 tiers to the internet where those that have the money, will get access to the fastest internet.

The excuse of AT&T and Verizon is that total user data usage is at the capacity of their network and that is why these controls are being put into place. Instead of screwing their customers, they should be focusing on building out their network, so it can meet capacity. These companies have not been investing in their infrastructure and now they are struggling to keep up with user adoption rates of smart phones. The only company with an unlimited data package is Sprint, but they are small compared to the other two, so their network is even smaller.

I for one am glad I did not upgrade to a smart phone. I saw this coming a long time ago. AT&T and Verizon will end up forcing everyone out of unlimited data plans and into their defined packages. Aren't oligopolies grand? This is the result of no competition. Anti-trust laws aren't enforced and mergers and acquisitions are allowed to happen.

Ive had three years of bad service and increasing monthly prices from AT&T. First started with a special for the Internet. I thought that was good so went to add on the U-verse... It wasn't long before the monthly bill was off the charts and I have only the basic service...

Just got my monthly bill with an increase... When they are having all the specials to rope people in... I'm done with AT&T...

AT&T IS NO WORSE than Verizon when it comes to 'customer service.'

The difference is Verizon has a larger network. And that's why people like it.

You don't care about customer service over price, by the way, and only complain about it. Because otherwise, America wouldn't keep shopping at Walmart.

So after getting over the lie that people actually think customer service matters over price, except for a really, really small minority of people, then you understand that yes, while false advertising, AT&T and Verizon and ALL carriers have limited bandwidth and it costs them money to increase it.

I've had Verizon and I have AT&T. Where I am, there is no difference in quality of signal. There is none in price. There isn't any help coming either, because with too few existing carriers in the US, telecommunications might as well be a monopoly all over again. So go ahead, and switch to Verizon so the monopoly can be complete. And see what happens to your contract then.

The posters that think this is simply just sleight of hand advertising, beware, it's not. This is criminal activity. Think of it this way. You go to a buffet, they advertise all you can eat $20. You sit down, start eating, go back for seconds, and they suddenly tell you. Oh sorry sir, it's all you can eat, but only whatever you can eat in five minutes. Now would that survive a lawsuit?

Sue them in small claims court. Unlimited must be just that - unlimited. Not throttled, not rationed. There was a precedent - one Honda Civic hybrid owner sued Honda for advertizing the mileage she never achieved on her car, and she won. AT&T execs will have fun defending the company in hundreds small claims courts, because they can't have lawyers represent them there.
Having said that, I boycott AT&T since mid-1990s, when they refused to refund some $5 for the international calls that never connected (turned out they charged a minute's worth for each dialing attempt, even though the line was busy).

A note for Mike 757....Sprint sells an Unlimited Plan on their network, which is about 40% of their coverage area, iirc. 300MB off their network. Make sure you read the fine print.

It's no good blaming the companies. They don't have the infrastructure to give everyone unlimited data. The smart phone market has expanded too fast. This will change given time, but until then they have to do what they have to do just to keep the data flowing at all.

Am I the only person left in America who doesn't feel the need to surf the net or watch movies during every moment of my day? The psychologists are right when they call it an addiction.

Regarding Verizon and their new "tiered" plans...

I too have been a Verizon customer for a number of years and my renewal is up. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that since I was already on an unlimited plan, that I would be "grandfathered" into it when I renew, rather than be forced to accept a lesser plan - for free... and as long as I remain a customer.

AT&T is protected and they know it. Even with your supposed contract which only benefits the carrier. The only recourse is to leave but your choices are very limited and your penalty can be huge.

I am on the Sprint Network after leaving Verizon who I was with since they started. Sprint gave the best deal especially for a family plan but at the cost of coverage. This isn't an issue for me because I travel very little and Sprint is pretty solid in my area but leave the confines of home and I miss Verizon. AT&T and Verizon were not even in the competition when it came to price. You would think that for the prices they charge these data issues would not be a problem.

All you iPhone loyalists----locking yourself into hardware is not a very smart move. You are slamming the door shut on T-Mobile because of loyalty to a company that only cares about getting your hard earned money for a product that is just as disposable as any other smartphone yet costs much more.

This story has many inaccuracies. But the users who continually use super amounts of data hinder the entire network. I support the tiered billing option. By the way throttling a user back still allows unlimited data just slow.

I think this article just points out the issue with smartphones....the networks are at capacity.

I thought about getting a smartphone so I could listen to streaming music. After I calculated that how much data it would use for even reasonable use, I decided against it.

I had AT&T for years. I dealt with the dropped calls and no service, because I was on an ancient unlimited plan to go with my old dumb phone. When I was in a good area, the phone would work, usually. Then it would inexplicably lose it signal, even when I never moved.

Finally my really old dinasoar of a phone died and I could not get a battery. After being with AT&T for 10 years, they offered me NOTHING to upgrade to a smart phone. Verizon GAVE me and a family member two smart phones, a great package with unlimited everything and no issues of dropped calls/service. NO, I don't work for Verizon, I just know how its been working. Even though we regularly hit 5-8 gigs a month, we don't have any issues.

Another thing, a different family member had issues with a really cheap phone they had gotten off the internet. It was one of those "free" phones you can get. They are usually reconditioned. Well it didn't work and after replacing it twice we decided to get rid of it. We went to a Verizon store at the mall and the manager there worked with us to get a good phone for less than $30 and no need to increase our monthly cost.

If you are having problems with Verizon, I suggest going into a Verizon store and seeing what you can do. Talking face-to-face with a real live person you will find that they often will be able to get things done that might not be done on the phone or internet.

"I don't think two to three gigabytes is an exorbitant amount," he said. "Really, I'm just looking at pictures and text once in a while."

Let's be honest then, you are NOT just looking at pictures and text once in a while. 2-3 GB's of data is HOURS and HOURS of video (depending upon compression).

I'm adamantly opposed to selling limited 'unlimited' dataplans, but people are lying when they say that just a few pics and text are 2-3 GB's.

Companies that treat customers as a unpleasent but necessary inconvenience needs to go away forever. I walked out of a store yesterday for that reason, 12 checkouts with 2 open and lines 6 deep. Seriously? They are in the business of selling to the PUBLIC.

Companies only cater to investors, everyone else is just tolerated.

After being with AT&T for 10 years, they offered me NOTHING to upgrade to a smart phone.

Yours story doesn't sound true. I upgarded to a smartphone and I had "free" options or $200 for an iPhone.

AG99, Excellent point. People forgot what a phone was for. There are way too many lazy people that can't function without their "toy". I especially get a laugh out of the person who needs the GPS function to get around their local town. I wonder if they sell maps in that town.

Not everyone understands bandwidth, and try to remember that too. Many people don't realize watching a youtube video takes a lot more bandwidth than reading some text on a screen.

Have never been an ATT customer and never will be. Verizon works just fine for me no matter where I am.

I have Verizon for my phone but my home plan Cable, phone, internet is AT&T. I can tell you first hand they have to fall within the top 3 worst customer service experiences ever. They are absolutely awful.

If you don't think speed is promised just watch one television ad. Where lightning fast speeds are promised in the commercials. No not everything in commercials is true, however u do have to be careful what you verbalize in advertising, it might come back to haunt you in court. In court it might also make a difference if the judge happens to be a disgruntled AT&T customer. These days when a business makes a bad decision you never know what job the customer holds. Just food for thought for anyone that provides bad customer service.

Phil-673730

Seriously? You're defending them?

I've been a Verizon Wireless customer since my very first cell phone - probably 12-15 years. I've always had pretty good customer service when I have to call in - most of the time they are really nice. When my daughter was in highschool, she lost her phone on my birthday and since she didn't want to upset me on my birthday, she decided to wait until the next day to tell me. In the meantime, some kids at her school found her phone and downloaded about $80 worth of ring tones, etc. Verizon tried to tell me that since we hadn't reported the phone lost right away, we were responsible for the charges (which is absolutely true), but after telling them the reason why it wasn't reported right away and pleading a little bit, they removed the charges. So, even though I think they are overpriced, because of the good customer service I've received over the years, I've stuck with them. I hope the prices eventually come down, but it seems like the majority of us keep paying without complaint, so they probably won't.

Phil-673730 - Using your logic, it would be like going to an all you can eat buffet and only being served one shrimp every six hours. "Well, the sign said all you can eat, but we didn't say you could have a whole meal at one time..."

Believe me when I say I'm no fan of AT&T. However much of the problem lies with the "smart phone" technology and the users. They are trying to use a telephone as a web surfing computer. These cell systems just don't have the bandwidth to allow everyone to browse the web and watch movies on their phone. If you want to watch videos go home and use your computer and cable connection which does have the bandwidth and use your phone for making calls. Remember when a phone was just a phone?

No one needs to stream movies to a handheld device. Who would want to watch a big screen movie on a video screen that is smaller than a grilled cheese sandwich? What is the need to be constantly entertained? Put down the phone and actually talk to the person sitting beside you.

I think i will "throttle" my payments! I will pay half my bill in half and show them that the service i signed up for has not been provided!

the one and only-1533412 - It is my opinion that if they don't have the ability to allow "everyone" to browse the web, they shouldn't offer the devices that actually allow this to happen. Smart phones are still relatively new, and as the technology increases, so will the needs of the users. If the phone companies want to offer the technology, they need to be able to support the usage.

"Now, a majority of AT&T subscribers on contract-based plans have smartphones, and the proportion is growing every month. That's putting a big load on AT&T's network."

this line ticked me off.

we dont have a frickin choice. they have basically eliminated the non-smart phone and package plans and all we have to pick from now are smart phones that MUST get smart phone packages.

this isnt because "thats how the market is today" - they forced the market in this direction.

As much as I enjoy the little bit of convienence my phone offers now that i've upgraded (and switched to AT&T)...I absolutely miss the cost of my old plan.

$70 versus $133

all so I can check facebook and google a question that is driving me nuts.

I cant at all say it's worth it or that i would have willing gone in this direction if the monopolies in this industry didnt force my hand.

and no, I wasnt going to buy one of those pre-paid crap phones with absolute horrific coverage. oh I thought about it, but they werent much cheaper than my old plan...

I considered buying someones used old phone and activating it on my account, but Verizon told me I couldnt do that. I dont know if that was true or not, I didnt push very hard though would have if I had no other option (financially).

As it were, I got sucked into the "new phones" and mostly, I just want to go back to the old ones. Or at the very least, go back to the old price.

A note for Mike 757....Sprint sells an Unlimited Plan on their network, which is about 40% of their coverage area, iirc. 300MB off their network. Make sure you read the fine print.

Of course you have to be on your carriers network to get your data at the rate your contract states, I don't need to read fine print to know the obvious. All I was saying was while on Sprints network, they are the only company currently offering unlimited uncapped unthrottled data plan.

the one and only-1533412:

Nobody "needs" running water or electricity in their house either. The point is not what you think others "need" (that's for them to decide and fund), the point is that AT&T is, effectively, not providing what they promised in the large and medium (and possibly small) print.

You obviously have some form of Internet access (since you posted here), but there are many who don't and many of those people probably don't think anyone "needs" Internet access. So I presume you would be happy if your provider of Internet service lowered your speed to one byte per day on the advice of those who think you don't "need" the service you believe you contracted for.

No, I'm not a disgruntled AT&T user. Although I can easily afford a smartphone and would find it useful at times, I've decided it's not worth the monthly cost for the slightly added convenience. If a carrier with decent coverage offered high bandwidth and high data volumes at a reasonable price, I'd jump at it. As it is, I've only had a smartphone when my employer is paying the bill (so, yes, I do know exactly what I'm missing by not having one when my employer is not paying for it).

As pointed out in the article, a lawsuit won't happen because there is no guarantee of high speeds. In fact, I can just about guarantee that the fine print says specifically that they DON'T guarantee high speeds (or any speed). An unlimited plan doesn't say it has to be unlimited high speeds. So those of you thinking that someone will sue them and win, you're wrong. Otherwise, any time that service was slow due to congestion, there would be lawsuits. Bandwidth can't be 100% guaranteed even without throttling.

That said, I think throttling at 2GB for the rest of the month is too much. Especially when that's not across the board, but only in areas with high congestion. 5GB makes more sense and have that across the board for everyone who isn't paying tiered prices. All cell phone companies will have some form of throttling or tiered plans if they don't already simply because none of them have enough infrastructure for the smartphone demand. They are expanding and improving what they have, but that takes time. The cellphone companies definitely shot themselves in the foot by forcing everyone to use smartphones, but there really wasn't enough data beforehand to suggest that there would be so much bandwidth usage until they had already done it. Now they have to limp by until they get everything where it needs to be. Just don't expect that to happen for at least 5 years and perhaps not for 10. Even then, they probably won't ever go back to unlimited.

AT&T has been fighting data usage problems with iPhone all along. They usually get things working again in a short about of time, but they continue to have problems. Especially when a new iPhone is released. I have a feeling iPhones are data hogs. It's that or AT&T just has a really horrible infrastructure.

I definitely prefer how Verizon handles throttling. It's temporary and only when absolutely needed. I do agree with capping bandwidth at a reasonable amount on phones. As I mentioned, 5GB seems reasonable to me. Any usage over that really isn't anything more than "play." That still gives you plenty of usage for watching some videos, playing games, etc. Also, stay away from regular browsing of Facebook because that site is a huge bandwidth hog if you stay connected for long. Use an app that keeps the usages to a minimum instead.

It won't be very long before all cable companies are limiting your home bandwidth as well. They are already looking at tiered plans instead of unlimited because of the high data usage by a relatively small number of customers. With the push toward online streaming of shows on sites like ABC, more and more people are watching shows online instead of on cable and that causes more congestion. All carriers (cable and cell) need to focus on beefing up their infrastructure to handle the bandwidth needs of the country. As it is, we've been way behind Europe for internet service for a long time. It's time we caught up. Of course, that probably means higher prices to pay for the improvements.

the one and only-1533412 said:

No one needs to stream movies to a handheld device.

Well, now that you've decided what no one needs, you can go stand over there with the guy who said cars would never replace horses.

So by this logic if I pay for an "all you can eat buffet" but they refuse to put out any food this is somehow legal? "They said I could eat all I wanted, they just didn't say they would provide any food"?!?

Have never been an ATT customer and never will be. Verizon works just fine for me no matter where I am.

I have used them all. None provide good quality everywhere. I used to travel extensively and had trials on all three big carriers. I chose ATT because that worked best at my home office.

Of course they don't, Nick. They don't have towers everywhere. No one should ever expect perfect service no matter where they are. That simply isn't possible with current technology. People should always choose the company that offers the best service where they need it. For some, Sprint or another smaller carrier may offer better service because they only need it in a small area where there's a tower. For those who travel all over, you really need a larger carrier because their network can support you better. For me, that's Verizon. In all my driving through most of the eastern and midwest states, I have very rarely lost signal and haven't lost a call due to something on my end in years. Sure, signal strenght may drop and I might not have a super clear call on occasion if I'm in the middle of nowhere, but I expect that. If I was in another place, then I might need to choose a different carrier. Too many people choose a carrier just because of who it is and then complain when the service isn't great.

The excuse of AT&T and Verizon is that total user data usage is at the capacity of their network

They don't need an excuse. Most people say dumb things. If bandwith was not a problem why would they scale you back? Just to piss you off? In my extensive business travel I found some hotels charged for bandwith. If you needed to send or receive large file you purchased it. Otherwise it was rejected by the local server.

Actually every cellular service limits their "unlimited data". Just been a first for anyone to really notice. And where ever you got your statistics they're off.

Seriously Nick, its not unlimited if they all but cut your phone off if you reach 2 gigs. Plus does the user have that much control over the amount they stream? Could they cut back the quality of a video if they so choose?

They offered unlimited data plans Nick on specific cell phones. Don't blame the user if they end up trying to use what they pay for, blame AT&T for their poor infrastructure.

Also browns Backer is correct. Why limit your choices by what phones are being offered. Iphones may have been the first smart phones, but there are plenty of solid options out there now. What good is a phone if the network doesn't allow you to use it?

You could pay me to have a "Smart-Phone" with the CarrierIQ root-kit secretly installed and sending every keystroke, stylus click, and contents of every text you send and receive to your Cell provider, CarrierIQ and whomever they decide to sell your information to. All while burning YOUR data plan bandwidth by piggy-backing inside your data stream.

That's right people. Your Cell service provide and CarrierIQ have installed a keystroke logger that bypasses even HTTPS and SSL encryption and sends it all to them. You passwords, user-names, every website you visit, and contents of every text. It records it as you enter it from the keyboard so all the security in the world won't help you. There is NO way to turn it off or "Opt Out". They don't tell you it's there and will deny it if you ask them. Don't believe me. Just Google it. If you are dumb enough to believe CarrierIQ denials after you see the guy that found its videos, ask yourself why the Government had him arrested and told him to basically "Shut the F up."? Could it be that DHS was tapping that same feed without a warrent??

I'm not a "tinfoil hat" guy, but that one makes you stop and think.

Of course this is false advertising. When you're down to dial-up speeds, half of the webpages won't even load due to time-out issues. They can word it however they want, throttling is a serious limitation.
But At&T aren't the worst, I'd say, Cricket is. They promise 'unlimited' too, and their cap is fairly high, but their actual speeds are so slow that internet is basically worthless and you can't even check your e-mail, unless it's 3 AM when few other people are on. They are cheap, but paying little for something you don't get is still wasted money.
BTW, I called customer service 3 times, and the call was dropped twice.

for Sally Lu, et al. You are absolutely correct. If the network can't handle this type of traffic then the phone companies should not provide devices that will overwhelm the system. But they do, so it's up to you to self regulate and to use the appropriate tools for the task. If you want to watch movies use your high speed connection and your computer not your phone. This is like someone trying to carry ten gallons of water in a one gallon bucket and then being surprised and angry that they can't do it and then blaming the bucket company for not making magic buckets.

As for the "need" I can't possibly comprehend why anyone would bother to try a watch something like a movie produced for big screen medium on a teeny tiny screen. What's the point? Again, why the need to be constantly entertained? Your phone company probably wonders the same thing which is why they're limiting your data.

And, I glad to see that you are using the lower bandwidth discussion forum rather than trying to download a video to your phone.

If the phone co.'s are overwhelmed, they shouldn't promise things that they can't keep and charge for something the customer might not get. Plain and simple. That's like advertising to serve sirloin steak but then serving chicken nuggets, because they ran out cows and still charge the price for premium steak. Get rid of these hoodlums.

AT&T is increasing monthly cost on their unlimited data BOO HOO HOO.... hahaha.

I went shopping for a cellphone the past 3 days. I learned some things.

AT&T customers, quit AT&T and get with Virgin Mobile. NO CONTRACTS. none. $55/month Unlimited calls & data.
No increase in Virgin's monthly cost -- they use Sprint's cell tower network.

That's why they have contracts. If you think you have a case drop the service and don't pay any more bills. Let them sue you and if you have a case you will win.

The U.S. is the only developed nation with prison sentence contracts. In Europe, the phones are unlocked with interchangeable sim cards depending on where one is and on which carrier you wish to use at the time.

How silly to think a rapid ramp up in usage - um, the iPhone and smarts have only been around for barely 5 years - by more and more people on the planet would be lawsuit material. Imagine how great it's going to be soon when 7 billion humans become 9 billion, each vying for the same resources: clean water, clean air, clean food and now unlimited communication data - all from a global mostly private corporate infrastructure that can't supply or support demand now.

littlechanges

I was with you on the first paragraph. Then you lost me on the second. Why would it not be lawsuit material? Promising something they know they cannot deliver sound like a violation of "truth in advertising" laws. This is akin to using your local freeway to often, so they install a governor on your car.

They could support demand, but they don't want to invest in the infrastructure. They want the billions that they're making to be all profit with little investment.

Nick46

Those companies won't sue you. They just lump you in with other non-paying customers and sell your debt to a collector at a much discounted price. They are now done with you and you now have to deal with a bill collector for at least 2 or 3 years, and your credit rating takes a big hit. There is nothing fair about that, and then you realize the other companies you have to sign up with aren't any better.

These companies shouldn't have sold 'Unlimited' data plans if they aren't able to support them. Perhaps a little planning (they know what bandwidth they need) could have prevented this. Problem is they still want to sell unlimited plans and get your money. Perhaps they never intended for the end-user to actually get
'Unlimited' data use.

Once there became a problem, they stopped selling the unlimited plans and started getting people moved over to the tiered plans. So they already did take the appropriate step. Smartphones are too new to have had enough data to know exactly what you could or could not support. Using over 2GB (some people use 10+GB) on a PHONE?! That would have sound ludicrous when the phones first came out. The usage was unexpected and it left cell phone companies scrambling.

As far as their unlimited plans go, they are still offering unlimited. They just have a limit on your speed. If you read your contract, I can just about guarantee that no matter what company you use, it states that they do NOT guarantee high speeds or even 100% connections. The guarantee on an unlimited plan is just that you can use it as much as you want. That doesn't mean it will be fast if you overuse it. Nothing false about that advertising as it's clearly displayed in your contract if you take the time to read it.

AT&T *is* going about this the wrong way, though. They could have done what others have done and not looked so bad. Uneven throttling that lasts for the rest of the month/billing cycle is ridiculous.

And, to be clear, the cell companies *are* investing in improving their infrastructure. It's just a very slow and expensive process. And AT&T's infrastructure wasn't very good to begin with, so it will be longer yet until that's caught up.

Those companies won't sue you. They just lump you in with other non-paying customers and sell your debt to a collector at a much discounted price.

If you feel you are being wronged then sue them. Take them to small claims court and plead your case. Just say the service is crappy and I gave them several tries to correct and they didn't. If the judge believes the story you will win. Unfortunately most people sit on their butt and do nothing but complain. So what has the carrier lost? Nothing.

This wouldn't be an issue if, after your two year contract was up, your service price was dropped to a non-contracted price. It doesn't though so the pricing model is so out of whack it's ridiculous. I'm just annoyed that, like someone else mentioned, you're forced into a data plan when you purchase a smart phone so when they say they saturated their network I don't feel sorry for them. No one forced them to sell these expensive smart phones and smart phone plans but they wanted the profit so this is what happens. The Telcos are having their cake and eating it to and it's frustrating to no end.

Won't happen. They've bought and paid for too many GOP Congressmen.

I signed up for and paid for AT&T service as part of a family package of 4 cells, home phone and unlimited data. It seems they are not living up to their end of the bargain. I also got a notice my "unlimited" long distance for my home phone was no longer being offered, but I'm grandfathered in. However, If I switch my combination plan, then I will lose that.

This "clever" way to improve profitability by AT&T management is only going to backfire on them.

Screwing your customers does not make them happy and loyal.

Bandwidth usage is just going to get worse. The company that improves their infrastructure to handle the load and offers a better deal to customers is going to win.

Squeezing out short term profit helps management bonuses but hurts long term sustainability.

READ the article: Unlimited data, even if you have been throttled, you still have unlimited DATA. nothing has ever been said about speed.

This is what happens when you let accountants make policies.

Phil, that's one customers belief, not a legal decision, or even the opinion of a legal analyst...

However, I agree with previous posters, small claims court.

Phil. So how long have you worked for ATT? There is a clear expectation, based on the advertising presented by ATT the the unlimited access to data will be at the same level of quality. To change the quality of the transmission constitutes deceptive advertising. They may not be guilty of breach of contract but they lied to their customers with the express intent of getting them to use their product.

All of the telecom companies, Sprint, ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile are lying, cheating, deceptive bottom feeding crap holes of companies interested only in lining their own pockets. They are no better than drug dealers who provide free drugs to people and, once the poor suckers are hooked, use the power of the drug to control their victims.

Actually Phil, at 56k speeds (dial up) even if you left your phone downloading day and night you will find that in fact you are limited to 24 hours and 30 days. This is indeed false advertising. ATT needs to alert customers their plan has a 2gb limit after which it will be shut off or they will need to pay more or go to another provider which is what we did some years back.

Every ad that I have ever seen for any type of internet access has fine print stating that speeds are not guaranteed--good luck with your lawsuits.

Sorry, but you're kidding yourself if you think ANY major telecom is going to be fined by the Feds. As others have said, they've already bought and sold all the Congressmen and Senators they need. Why else would the US be the only country in the free world where the sender and recipient both pay for the same text message, even if both parties are using the same carrier? That's downright double-dipping, should be blatantly illegal, but it's blindly accepted for reasons beyond my understanding. In other countries, only the person sending the text or placing the call pays. Incoming calls and texts are always free because THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN PAID FOR by the person who initiated them!

And don't even get me started on "cramming." How THAT'S not already illegal is just beyond belief.

There's just not enough choice in the US to prevent mobile phone companies from running roughshod over their customers like this. If you want GSM mobile service, you have precisely two nationwide carriers from which to choose (AT&T and T-Mobile). If, for some bizarre reason, you prefer CDMA (which presumes you never leave the country with your phone), you also have precisely two choices (Verizon and Sprint). A duopoly isn't a whole hell of a lot better than a monopoly. So it's not like you've got a lot of choice if you're fed up with AT&T. Be glad the Feds did their job and blocked the T-Mobile acquisition. That would have been disastrous for GSM customers.

@NEBodyHome

Speeds that are not guaranteed due to unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances are one thing. Deliberately throttling data transfer rates is a different kettle of fish entirely.

What's the difference between a telecom company and a carp?

One is a scum sucking bottom feeder and the other is a fish.

The fact that the contract you agree to states that speeds are not guaranteed is enough to let them limit your speeds for a wide variety of reasons. Unless the contract stipulates "unforseen and uncontrollable circumstances," your argument has no legal bearing. Throttling has been around for a VERY long time and has always been considered legal.

As far as their ads, sure they are misleading. There are very few ads that are not. Personally, I'd like the law that states you can't lie in an ad to be expanded to say that you can't deliberately mislead either. It won't ever happen, but it would be nice. Just look at all the diet commercials that make you believe they work when they don't, for a good example. Or all of the toothpastes that are all recommended by 4 out of 5 dentists. Either way, as long as the law just says they can't lie to you, they aren't going to get in trouble for their commercials. Their ad simply says it's fast. That's true. It doesn't say that you'll have a fast connection if you're out in the middle of nowhere. It doesn't say that the speed will always be faster than a competitor's speed. They just say that it's fast. It's misleading, but it's not a lie. And let's be honest here... anyone who actually believes advertising is naive. If you care about whether or not something is true, read the fine print. If you don't, then you can only blame yourself when something is done that you weren't expecting. And throttling was expected long before it happened. Sure, AT&T is going about it completely wrong, but that's pretty normal for AT&T.

The fact that the contract you agree to states that speeds are not guaranteed is enough to let them limit your speeds for a wide variety of reasons. Unless the contract stipulates "unforseen and uncontrollable circumstances," your argument has no legal bearing. Throttling has been around for a VERY long time and has always been considered legal.

Not necessarily. Even if they state that speeds are not guaranteed, they are stating their intention to ATTEMPT to bring you those speeds. If they are no longer attempting to bring you those speeds, then they have violated your contract.

Contract law isn't as clear cut as you would think. A judge will have to review the contracts and determine if it's been violated.

Throttling has been around long before cell service and has always been considered legal. Unless they really messed up their contract (I haven't seen it), then it's unlikely anyone can win against them. The only thing that might hurt them is the amount of throttling done. 99% (if real considering half of what you read on MSN is a lie) could be grounds for them to get in trouble. If it were 50%, it's extremely unlikely anyone could win a lawsuit unless the judge is a moron. And if AT&T wanted to fight that, the lawsuit would go to a higher court where the judge isn't a moron and win.

I'm not saying AT&T is handling this well, because they aren't. However, if the contract says what basically any internet contract says, that there are NO guarantees of bandwidth, then that puts the brakes on basically any lawsuit.

People can always claim they thought something meant something else, but any adult who is honest with themselves would understand that "unlimited" probably has some strings attached to it, no matter what it is. The first thing I thought when seeing unlimited data on a cell phone was that if you abuse that, you'd face some consequence. Based on cable and other internet uses of throttling long before cell phones came out, that would be my expectation if the system is abused. This should be obvious to anyone who has the least bit of intelligence.

Besides, how many times do you need to see multiple companies all claiming to be the best or the fastest before you realize that they can't all be the best or fastest? There is a limit to claiming you misunderstood when most people do understand.

If AT&T is having an issue with their service, then they need to improve their infrastructure

They all have problems. They don't have to improve anything. They have millions of users. And actually having the megausers go somewhere else will improve their service.

Yes, it is an infrastructure issue with all carriers. As well as greed. They all currently throttle or have contingency plans to do so for the ever-increasing demand they can't supply. Even Comcast throttles their broadband consumers. However, if ATT didn't throw off a BIG dividend, likely many investors wouldn't own stock of such a long-time reviled, crappy corporation that enjoys sticking its finger in the eye of every customer.

Gbaughma:

I agree with you that throttling certain traffic (such, as you suggest, YouTube videos) when an area is currently overloaded might be a reasonable thing.

However, such selective service probably presents a legal and technical thicket for AT&T when the providers of the throttled services lobby their congress critters and/or start a tech war of masking the source/nature of the content (for example via encryption etc).

Comcast used to do some traffic shaping and under pressure (including from the Feds) dropped it in favor of hard caps on bytes. Admittedly, Comcast's shaping technique was a bit spookier than just delaying bytes (they, IIRC, introduced RST packets to break connections) so it's not quite the same.

Yeah, Comcast didn't handle that very well. Even if they did, once you start limiting access to specific things on the internet, even if it's just lower speeds, then you start getting into the area of censoring and that is not likely to be accepted by very many people. It sounds like a good thing, but it really isn't. Does it make sense that someone who uses 0.5GB of data a month is throttled just because they want to watch a youtube video for a change? They aren't causing the problem in the first place. It's the people using a boat load of bandwidth each month who are causing the problems. The limit should be entirely on them, but it should be handled better than AT&T is doing.

Suckers? In what universe can you get anything today that is "unlimited" and has no strings attached? We are a greedy bunch of people and we will consume every bit of bandwidth possible, given the chance. I'd ask anyone that thinks badwidth should be unlimited and un-restricted, do you leave your Wifi network open for anyone to piggy-back for free off of it? Hell no you don't, and if you do, you implement policy to restrict it's use.

Those who feel they pay a premium for unlimited data (grandfathered in), in reality don't when you look at the facts as we know them today.

STexan - you missed the point. If you pay for Unlimited your expectations are for Unlimited, not Unlimited @ 56K.

READ the article: Unlimited data, even if you have been throttled, you still have unlimited DATA. nothing has ever been said about speed.

phil!!

you have posted the same thing about a dozen times!

then it is false adervisment!!

the commercial doesnt say fastest 4g or 3g, unless you cap out!

and this is an new policy, i might have to see if it is in the contract.

so get off your horse!

this is horse crap cause i PAY $5 more than the tiered people!!

now if it doesnt say how fast the rate is, it SURE AS HELL DOESNT SAY HOW SLOW IT IS EITHER!!!!

now if it doesnt say how fast the rate is, it SURE AS HELL DOESNT SAY HOW SLOW IT IS EITHER!!!!

So if it isn't in the contract that states "your speed will be ...." they can use whatever speed they want.

Try measuring your home internet speed it goes up/down like a whores draws never stable and NEVER the speed I pay for.

Again Phil, read the article. That's the opinion of one customer, not a legal decision or the opinion of a legal analyst... until it comes before a judge, we won't know the outcome of that lawsuit.

But I think small claims court would be key here.

@STexan

The wifi reference is kind of lame. You don't open it up due to security, not usage. If all I had were BRD and Internet TV, I'd leave it open if I wasn't capped at 100 GB per month. (up from previous 10 GB limit 2 years ago)

@STexan...the reason I secure my wi-fi isn't because I'm worried about someone using my bandwidth...it's because I'm more concerned about someone accessing private files on my network, or sending out a virus that gets tracked back to my IP...I have 35mb up and down from FIOS, so someone has to be hammering on my network to slow me down.

I have AT&T for my carrier, but I also have a Verizon MiFi. The reason is that AT&T has yet to upgrade their network in a lot of the areas that I travel, and Verizon at least offers 3G in those areas. I've had issues with customer service with both companies, so we're all stuck when it comes to that. None of the companies actually care about the customer, but instead how much $$$ they can pocket. It's sad, but it's the reality of the situation, and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

With AT&T I am grandfatherd in on my line, but my wife's line isn't. She doesn't use as much as I do, so it's not an issue. But at the same time I've never received the text msg telling me I'm in danger either. When that happens though I may just look to jump ship to Sprint.

STexan - you missed the point. If you pay for Unlimited your expectations are for Unlimited, not Unlimited @ 56K.

Sounds like someone is assuming again. I went to a "all you can eat buffet" and they kicked us out after 3 hours. We complained that it was all we could eat. They said that they were asking us to leave so it was all we could eat.

To Phil this throttling is not just slowing down speeds it'scompletely removing any and all access to internet. I got hit after 1.5 gigs and was not even able toconnect whatsoever. My phone kept saying connnection error. So the one month i couldn't access wifi it cost my business over $40,000 for me not to have any connection. So this is indeed false advertising, based upon we should have unlimited data for the whole 30 day billing cycle. Not unimited for 10 days and no internet for 20 day. So that is false advetising, and failure toupholdtheir end of a contract.

Everyone is railing on Phil, but the man is actually correct from a legal standpoint. "Unlimited" does NOT, in fact, mean (or even imply) "unlimited data at the fastest speeds our network can handle." As long as they're not stopping your data stream, or charging you more for it, they have met their obligation. But that's just from a legal standpoint. As for the "playing nice" standpoint, that's a different kettle of fish.

Throttling 99% of the bandwidth away is evil and mean, yes. But you guys are presumably adults. Corporations don't exist to make everyone feel better. Few things can be more ruthless than a corporation with a mandate.

Thinkforyourself - Phil probably is wrong from a legal standpoint. Throttling a phone to the point where a data package is useless would probably get the Plaintiff a refund in small claims court.

to Thinkforyourself-2427469 - But they do give representations of high speed access in their advertising. the disclaimer of no speed guarantees does not cover a direct singling out of specific customers and throttling them or cutting them off completely.

Yes, "legal" definition of "unlimited" by the courts definition would not be what is written in text by AT&T. They would ask the question to the jury or judge what "unlimited" should mean to any reasonable person. That is how they obtain definitions in trials.

then it is false adervisment!!

the commercial doesnt say fastest 4g or 3g, unless you cap out!

and this is an new policy, i might have to see if it is in the contract.

The commercial also doesn't say that you'll get super fast speed in the middle of nowhere when the signal strength is really low. That's not reason enough to win a lawsuit. Lawsuits about things like this are won or lost based on the fine print. Read it. I don't have AT&T (I never will), so I can't read your contract, but I can just about guarantee that it says quite clearly that they offer NO guarantee of speed. It doesn't say that they guarantee speeds unless there is a problem. It says no guarantees whatsoever. Unless someone can show that the statement is not legal for some reason, then they are covered. Contracts are there for the exact reason that people try to win lawsuits by claiming that they understood something to mean something else entirely. If the contract is clear, that argument won't win. Also, throttling has been around for a long time and has always been considered legal. AT&T is going about it really poorly and throttling too much imo, but throttling isn't against the law regardless of "unlimited data".

We get it Phil. Posting the same thing over and over doesn't make it any more valid.

So the one month i couldn't access wifi it cost my business over $40,000 for me not to have any connection. So this is indeed false advertising, based upon we should have

So maybe you should have had the business plan. No limits there. Better than losing $40K. I maen when you try to beat the system don't blame the system.

So the one month i couldn't access wifi it cost my business over $40,000 for me not to have any connection.

Riiiight, you do know they could have just paid more and gotten your cap raised right? If you are going to make something up at least try to make it a little more believable.

"So the one month i couldn't access wifi it cost my business over $40,000 for me not to have any connection."

If you are going to make up a sob story like that you should at least try to sort of be believable, or at least somewhat know what you are talking about. Data plans and wifi, have absolutely nothing to do with eachother. If you couldn't get on wifi, you either had a problem with your phone or your land based network. Second, lost $40,000... give me a break. If you thought you were going to loose $1,000 you would have just paid for more data, used ohh, I don't know, a computer to access your email, called people, or heck, bought another cellphone for more data. Yawn, move along, nothing to see here.

Not being able to access wifi simply meant that there wasn't any wifi in the are to use. Since i do have to use my phone for buisness, as owning 3 over the road trucks. Also data and wifi have everything to do with each other. If you can't use wifi then you have to use the data. And since I have the unlimited plan how would i exactly buy more than unlimited data for the phone? Also the business plans dohaved limited data that cost more money than the $30 unlimited plan, so why would i pay more money to get less product? None of these argument have any logic to them. And i personally don't care if anyone believes me or not on my business. My point in my last statement was that I have an unlimited data plan, and after using 1.5 gigs i essentially was stripped of even being able to use the internet at all, which is not giving me unlimited data. 0 speed and 0 data is no longer unlimited data. I would also add that because of this I was able to cancel my 2 year contract december that i signed in December with no early termination fee, and have moved on to sprint.

Att is completely committed to their customer base, what an awful thing to say. Clearly, you don't understand how much they do every day for their customers. What? Oh you mean those funny looking hominid bipeds with strange boxes in their hands? No, no, that's not an ATT Customer. An Att customer has a nice suit, glasses, and many stock certificates in their hands. Now that's the only customer that matters.

An idiotic post to say the least, and uninformed. There are far less customers with nice suits, glasses and stock certificates than there are of you. And you pay the same price as they do. What, you say, that is unfair? Because they happen to have been more successful than you, they should pay a far higher price for the same service as you? Surely yuou jest!

25sed I believe rrobeson was saying is the stockholder and profits are more important to AT&T than the customer.

They are neither price competitive, nor trustworthy.

TRUSTWORTHY?
you actually trust your phone company?

i would trust the devil before i trust any phone company!

at least you know he is going to screw you! these companies tell you they love you as they stab you in the back as they hug you!!

AND THATS EVERY COMPANY!!!!

i tolerate them and sleep with one eye open waiting for this moment.

was i happy, no!
was i suprised the company was looking for a way to screw me again? NO!!!

i have a friend that works for ATT, i might just punch him in the face now!!!

This has nothing to do with owning the government. I had an unlimited plan with AT&T when they first came out with the IPhone but their service was so bad in the Dallas area (dropped calls, slow service etc.) that I changed when other companies started with smart phones. If you don't like their service, switch. If enough people switch, they will improve their service. The government isn't making you stay with them....blame the consumer, not the government.

They get away with so much because the majority of Americans are morons. Just look who they put in the White House, and the OP is a finer example as well.

Shows how little you know about America. American companies are not owned by the government, the companies OWN the GOVERNMENT!

American companies get away with too much because there are not enough government restrictions on them to do the right thing.

tired, in a way the government is forcing you to stay with your carrier by allowing punitive penalties for dropping a contract.

Think of it this way: what if your supermarket made you sign a contract that said you can only shop with them or you will be fined. Now tell me how a telephone provider is any different.

own the government

Insider trading, super PACS, unlimited donations.

F..ing BS

JM: I'm not defending the phone companies, but here's how it's different. When I renewed my Verizon contract, I got an iPhone 4s for $170. This is a device that ordinarily retails for around $700 (after all, it's a miniaturized computer in your hand that also sends radio signals). If I break my contract early, Verizon would take a huge hit on the price that they sold it to me for. So basically, you're agreeing to provide them with guaranteed income in exchange for discounted pricing on the device. Both sides are offering something in the contract. It would be like Kroger offering to discount their groceries 50% for the next two years as long as you agree to pay a fine for shopping at H-E-B.

Now as for the government, yes corporations own it. But most Americans are too stupid to realize that the whole government is the problem. Instead, we divide into democrats and republicans, liberals and conservatives, and no one ever hold more than HALF of the government accountable for anything. It's never "my side" that causes the problems. It's always "them dern liberals" or "those damn teabaggers" that screw up the country. Nope. It's all of them.

Of course telecom companies who have a near monopoly should be broken up. But that'll NEVER happen. They pretty much own the government. And as a back-up... Have pretty much brainwashed a good majority of the public into thinking ANY kind of government interference in private business... Will lead to CERTAIN DISASTER!!

So yeah... They're going to pretty much do what they want. Charge what they want... And as long as the other what?? ONE alternative is on board... You're going to have to eat it.

You're a total dope. Get your facts straight. The Obama regime is a socialist entity.

Step into the next century my friend, it's a smart phone, not just a phone. Trolling is bad for your health.

Edit: As the article also stated, other companies have implemented "better" measures for throttling usage, other than this piece of crap they implemented. Get it..??

Smart phone..its not to smart if they lower your usage for having kids play games./watch videos for hours on it..then if you want to call 911 takes forever to connect.

You obviously either don't get the technology or are some sort of apologist for AT&T.

Get this, it doesn't matter what purpose the phone is used for. Why is it your business or AT&Ts?? They are only doing this to force people from their plans, which they are unwilling to support (i.e. create more/better infrastructure).

It would have been better if they simply removed it altogether, but they are unwilling to lose a million+ users so they are pushing them out one by one probably hoping they are loyal(stupid) enough to just stay with them at a lower plan.

Being in the top 5% doesn't mean a certain percentage. As the high users start to drop off, then the top 5% gets lower until all these folks leave.

BAD business is BAD business. Your support of this is suspect.

I always thought data and cellular were separate, someone who knows chime in, because I don't think having a congested data network is going to cause you to stop making calls?

They were fools to offer an unlimited plan. What if your power or gas company throttled back your supply by 99%? How would you like unlimited movie rentals but the movie store only has 5 movies for rent? When the plan is unlimited you can use it any way you wish. I have ATT for internet, U-verse, and land line and I'm glad I don't have them for cell service.

The ATT my father retired from over 20 years ago was a great company, now they suck!!!

A HOLES, when do we think this will change? It won't change.

I remember my first phone. $29 per month 30 minutes, 50 cents per minute over and roaming charges of $1.75 per call. So in today's world taking your money and giving you nothing is not quite accurate. What is accurate on these boards is that everyone complains about prices no matter what it is unless they sell it.

"people who unreasonably expect other users to subsidize their extra-heavy use of the device"

All I have to say is "seriously?"

People who pay more than tiered data plans, and get less data than tiered data plans are expecting the tiered data plans to subsidize them... Someone didn't read the article.

why do you mental midgets have to throw your political bipartisan bullsh*t into every discussion?

*blocked/ignored*

If you don't contact the gov, in this case your state Attorney Generals Office, you cannot expect much. Enough complaints into them about it, and they will read the contract fine print. If ATT is in the wrong, they will force them to make it right.