The Federal Trade Commission is
suing AT&T for not being particularly trustworthy about their "unlimited" data plans:
In July 2011, Defendant decided to begin reducing the data speed for unlimited mobile data plan customers, a practice commonly known as “data throttling.” Under Defendant’s throttling program, if an unlimited mobile data plan customer exceeds the limit set by Defendant during a billing cycle, Defendant substantially reduces the speed at which the customer’s device receives data for the rest of that customer’s billing cycle.
In October 2011, Defendant began restricting the data speed for unlimited mobile data plan customers whose data usage exceeded thresholds imposed by Defendant. Initially, the data usage threshold at which Defendant throttled customers varied across geographic markets. The threshold was as low as 2 GB per billing cycle in dense markets like New York City and the San Francisco Bay Area.
In March 2012, Defendant modified its data throttling program. Under the revised version, Defendant set a uniform nationwide data usage threshold of 3 GB per billing cycle for devices using Defendant’s 3G network (e.g., iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4) and HSPA+ network (e.g., iPhone 4S), and 5 GB per billing cycle for devices using Defendant’s LTE network (e.g., iPhone 5, 5S, 6, 6 Plus).
The complaint goes on to talk about how AT&T reduced customers' speeds, in some cases, by as much as 90%, and that they
knew what they were doing was deceptive.
In an UNRELATED case from a couple of weeks ago, AT&T settled for $105 million because:
The practice is called cramming, and in the mobile carriers’ case it involves premium SMS, a dinosaur left over from the pre-smartphone age used to delivered content to consumers’ phones through text messages. Considering most people can get horoscope and celebrity news free on their mobile browsers, many premium SMS providers have evolved from content providers into scammers, tricking consumers into signing up for their subscriptions and fraudulently placing charges on their bills. According to the FTC, the typical charge is $9.99 a month.
Just last week Comcast reached a $50 million dollar settlement to around 800,000 customers
for "over-charging":
In the lawsuit, begun in December 2003, the plaintiffs accused Comcast of trying to monopolize the Philadelphia-area cable TV market and unfairly raising prices by buying rivals or swapping coverage areas, resulting in peak market share of 77.8 percent in 2002.
On the same day it was announced that Verizon will pay out
$64.3 million in cash and phone credits in a settlement because:
The underlying lawsuit claims that Verizon over-billed plan members in one of two ways: 1) by charging plan members for “in-network” minutes that were supposed to be free; 2) by charging the addition phones included in the Family SharePlan 45 cents a minute for exceeding an allotted monthly allowance, rather than the 25 cents that was charged to the primary phone in the plan.
At every turn these companies act the way that someone getting yelled at on
Judge Judy would act. But we should trust them with Net Neutrality, right?