|
|
|
|
|
Phone Collector
My point is that if you were do it, you'd have almost no chance of succeeding. The only person who would come out ahead would be your lawyer after you'd paid his fees and costs.Originally Posted by Leslieann
They don't want it going to court because it's a massive waste of their time and money to defend a lawsuit that the plaintiff isn't likely to win.
That's a serious misunderstanding of how contract law works - its basically backwards. Any two or more parties can put absolutely anything in any contract except those things that are specifically prohibited by law. The law allows any sane parties to enter into any agreement they want - if that wasn't true, private contracts couldn't exist.
A contract that gives one party to end the relationship at any time for any reason with no third party reviews qualifies as broad. Thinking otherwise is your right, but to do so is to blind yourself from something pretty obvious.
The vast majority of contracts are found to be enforceable. It's not a good idea to cherry pick the concept that because a few cases have been lost by some party or another for some reason or another, you're on solid legal ground. What matters is the actual contract before the court. (FWIW "Precedent" is a legal term with a defined meaning - the vast majority of cases are not precedent setting.)
The Supreme Court of the United States just ruled otherwise, last month, in a case that just happened to involve a wireless communications services provider, specifically stating that Federal arbitration law overrules any state laws that have tried to limit or prohibit mandatory arbitration. A link to a news story is available in my previous post.
If you freely enter into a contract where you agree not to do an activity (like tethering, for example) you don't have a leg to stand on in court. Argue in generalities all you want, but on this specific issue your argument is total baloney. You have no case.
Phone Collector
A lot comes down to simply how good your lawyer is, and I don't think it's quite as set in stone that you would lose as you think, but as usual in tethering threads, we won't decide it here since it's all theoretical, so, meh.
Your village called, they want their idiot back.
My antenna is smaller than yours
Wirelessly posted (lg optimus v,huawei m835: Opera/9.80 (Android; Opera Mini/7.29952/27.1813; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 Version/11.10)
this is a lost cause. many people have be shut off because of tethering. why hasn't anyone been to court and won?tethering has been going on for years. you would lose in court.why would sprint have a TOS if it doesn't work.it sounds like you don't want to admit stealing makes a person a thief. tethering is stealing
I've got more phones than fingers
Wirelessly posted (Virgin Mobile HTC WFS: Opera/9.80 (Android; Opera Mini/7.29952/27.1813; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 Version/11.10)
how is it stealing? if you are paying for access to a service??? and you are using a device they themselves sold you???
They can of course accuse you of attempting to save money, being frugal, discovering and sharing a method of efficiently using a service.
Just like phone calls, you are paying Sprint/VM in this case for access to a network, for a set ammount of time, to use a predetermined ammount of resources.
Their position on tethering, via their TOS, is to discourage subs from partaking in the practice. It is nearly impossible to enforce. It is equivalent to a water company indication on their TOS that mixing sugar and food coloring is prohibited, after you purchase water you should only consume it from our containers, you may not use a glass or a straw to consume water, refrigerating the product is also discouraged, freezing water is also prohibited especially during hot summer months... you can of course purchase bags of ice from our company if you need to use frozen water.
you can also purchase some of our sweet flavored water for your enjoyment, and be sure to visit the frozen food section where you will find a variety of our frozen water treats as well....
stealing....
Last edited by vmobi; 05-28-2012 at 07:52 AM.
CON-Tracts??? We don't need no stinking contracts!
Phone Collector
Can you find someone that posted online that they had service terminated by VM for tethering I read these and other forums and have never heard of anyone's service getting shut off.
I've got more phones than fingers
Yes, I can point to several... Oh wait, that's TracFone and friends. With Virgin Mobile you have virtually nothing to worry about.
I've got more phones than fingers
It won't officially be listed in the TOS as a prohibited use of the service until July 1, 2012. Past results might not be indicative of the comapny's future plans.
I'll probably stop using tethering on July 1 and watch this forum to see if anyone gets cut off for tethering in the next couple of months after.
Phone Collector
No.
It's been prohibited in the terms of service for well over a year, the change is that they now allow it, if you pay for it.
I've got more phones than fingers
Pay more money to do something I could do before: totally ethical.
My antenna is smaller than yours
Wirelessly posted (lg optimus v,huawei m835: Opera/9.80 (Android; Opera Mini/7.29952/27.1813; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 Version/11.10)
people that make comments like this are the same people that cry and complain about things changing for the worst.the people that tether could be part of the reason virgin mobile is changing the policy.every person that tethers think that they have nothing to do with it but fact is that every single person that tethers contributes to the problem. then people go posting instructions how to do it and thousands and thousands learn how to do it.don't you people feel bad or guilty that your pretty much stealing service? didn't anyone think throttling and data caps could happen?sure we don't know for sure that tethering caused throttling or data caps but no one can say for sure tethering didn't cause it.i honestly don't think tethering caused caps and throttling but people talking about it doesn't help.
Mobile Pro
I personally feel that since throttling has begun it's your 2.5 gigs to use as you wish. Just because they now offer it for sale on a single phone model means that suddenly they'll be losing revenue by other people tethering? As far as downloading a tethering app, that doesn't prove an intent to steal, you're just restoring functionality that's been native to Android since FroYo.
Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2
VM Journey= LG Rumor2>Samsung Intercept UD6>Motorola Triumph CM7 TG-Reloaded>HTC Evo V?
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks