Verizon to stop blocking tethering apps, settles with FCC

[mikeiskran90]

This is good news for AT&T subscribers as well! Maybe they'll be forced to allow tethering on the LTE network as well.

[Antenna]

This is good news for AT&T subscribers as well! Maybe they'll be forced to allow tethering on the LTE network as well.

I don't know why, as ATT did not have the provisions in the C-block 700mhz like Verizon did....

[GerryA]

Page 8, Sect 14 Other, last sentence states: That does not give customers with unlimited data the right to tether for free.

I read nothing in that order which permits VZW customers to tether for free. It instead prohibits VZW from blocking any app which permits tethering from the Application store. There's not one word in that consent decree, that says VZW may not charge a fee for tethering.

Has anyone called to try and add the verizon hotspot feature? Sounds to me like they have to allow the apps back on the market, but does that mean they have to allow tethering free on a tiered plan?

[newyork4me]

Page 8, Sect 14 Other, last sentence states: That does not give customers with unlimited data the right to tether for free.

I read nothing in that order which permits VZW customers to tether for free. It instead prohibits VZW from blocking any app which permits tethering from the Application store. There's not one word in that consent decree, that says VZW may not charge a fee for tethering.

I agree with you. It has to just do with VZW blocking the purchase/downloading of tethering apps from the Marketplace/Google Play, and VZW has to stop such blocking.

Plus, I would say that if it does mean that VZW can't charge the $30/month for their tethering, customers will have to do nothing. VZW will remove it automatically.

BTW, AT&T was even more aggressive in blocking such tethering apps. Is there a similar order against AT&T???

Okay, you do realize both of you are arguing with the person who was the FIRST person to note that VZW was not allowed to do this after their actions broke last year. Some of the same people argued with me in that thread, were proved wrong, and continue to argue with me today.

The is the last time I'm going to attempt to explain it because my time is valuable:

Mobile Broadband Connect is VZW's own tethering solution. The line Sam quoted just recognizes that VZW has recently done away with their fee for their own product. It speaks of nothing for the general order which is that they cannot block or charge extra for the use of any apps on any application store, including tethering apps.

If you read the order closely, you'll note the proscription on blocking or charging for the use of any 3rd party app--including tethering apps--applies to customers with devices that access the C-block spectrum. It's that general. As in, even those with unlimited plans cannot be prevented or charged more for using any 3rd party app, including those that provide tethering (PDAnet, FoxFi, etc.)

End of story: Unlimited data plan users can tether for free with 3rd party apps.

[newyork4me]

I don't know why, as ATT did not have the provisions in the C-block 700mhz like Verizon did....

Exactly.

[10 chars]

[Sam73065]

Okay, you do realize both of you are arguing with the person who was the FIRST person to note that VZW was not allowed to do this after their actions broke last year. Some of the same people argued with me in that thread, were proved wrong, and continue to argue with me today.

The is the last time I'm going to attempt to explain it because my time is valuable:

Mobile Broadband Connect is VZW's own tethering solution. The line Sam quoted just recognizes that VZW has recently done away with their fee for their own product. It speaks of nothing for the general order which is that they cannot block or charge extra for the use of any apps on any application store, including tethering apps.

If you read the order closely, you'll note the proscription on blocking or charging for the use of any 3rd party app--including tethering apps--applies to customers with devices that access the C-block spectrum. It's that general. As in, even those with unlimited plans cannot be prevented or charged more for using any 3rd party app, including those that provide tethering (PDAnet, FoxFi, etc.)

End of story: Unlimited data plan users can tether for free with 3rd party apps.

I don't have a clue or even really care who argued with you over the topic of 3rd party apps being blocked last year. However during my reading of the recently issued order/agreement between the FCC and VZW over 3rd party apps, in particular tethering apps, I did not uncover any statement or declaration, that VZW must allow you to tether for free. It clearly states that VZW may not broadly ban 3rd party tethering apps or other 3rd party apps, while reserving the right of VZW to block apps which are unlawful or harmful to the network, customers or their devices. It does not mandate free tethering. The closest the order comes to allowing customers to tether for free, is the statement on page 8, paragraph 14 other actions, where it states that customers on usage based plans, who subscribe to VZW Mobile Connect, may unsubscribe without penalty. It does not clearly state that VZW has to allow usage based plan customer to tether for free, only that they are not required to use the VZW tethering app to tether. The issue of whether or not unlimited data plan customers may tether for free is not addressed at all in this order. If I have overlooked that paragraph or pertinent line in my reading, I'd love for you to point it out, so that I can apologize for having missed it. If this order references material not contained in the order, which says that any customer on the 700 mhz C-block can tether for free, I'd appreciate the link.

Now if you are correct that VZW has to allow unlimited data customers to tether for free, just how long until they completely eliminate unlimited data? I suspect that as soon as the customer's contract runs out, that VZW would eliminate the unlimited data feature and force the customer to choose a tiered data option.

[timvideo]

Now if you are correct that VZW has to allow unlimited data customers to tether for free, just how long until they completely eliminate unlimited data? I suspect that as soon as the customer's contract runs out, that VZW would eliminate the unlimited data feature and force the customer to choose a tiered data option.

Its already in the process besides people that run businesses and are able to write off the full retail of smartphones usually $649.99 must people would give into tiered plans for a cheaper phone and learn to use wifi at home and at coffee shops and mcdonalds more accordingly.

[Sam73065]

Its already in the process besides people that run businesses and are able to write off the full retail of smartphones usually $649.99 must people would give into tiered plans for a cheaper phone and learn to use wifi at home and at coffee shops and mcdonalds more accordingly.

That it is already in the process is not the point I was making. If VZW is forced to allow unlimited data users to tether for free, then there is absolutely no incentive for VZW not to eliminate your unlimited data feature the day after you plan expires and force you on to a tiered data plan or into the new Everything Share plans.

[newyork4me]

That it is already in the process is not the point I was making. If VZW is forced to allow unlimited data users to tether for free, then there is absolutely no incentive for VZW not to eliminate your unlimited data feature the day after you plan expires and force you on to a tiered data plan or into the new Everything Share plans.

Except, of course, that non-subsidized lines equate to about $20/mo more in profit, considering the iPhone has a ~$400 subsidy and you can upgrade every 20 months. So, based on the $30/mo they used for individual lines on tiered (2GB and 4GB with double data), a non-subsidized unlimited line is equivalent to about $50/mo for a subsidized line. VZW can easily afford to offer unlimited data for that--and it makes their revenue to cost of sales look excellent.

[taoman54]

The is the last time I'm going to attempt to explain it because my time is valuable:

Whew! I guess we should all feel honored that you grace us with your presence.

End of story: Unlimited data plan users can tether for free with 3rd party apps.

In your mind perhaps but at what ultimate cost? Is there any part of this verbiage in the FCC Consent Decree that you don't understand?

nothing herein prejudices Verizon Wireless’s right to determine what
Applications its customers are allowed to purchase through Verizon
Wireless’s billing mechanisms or to take remedial actions, including
termination of service, against customers who violate the terms and
conditions of their service plans or Verizon Wireless’s policies applicable to
the service provided to such customers.

Not paying for tethering on an unlimited data plan is a violation of the Terms of Services on a grandfathered unlimited data plan. I'm certainly not saying Verizon definitely will do anything to those that tether without paying on unlimited data plans. But I am saying there is nothing in the FCC Consent Decree that prohibits it. And I can find at least a dozen tech writers/articles/blogs that back up what I'm saying. Can you find ONE reputable tech article or blog that backs up what you are saying? I'll be waiting.

From CNET.com:

What if I have an old Verizon unlimited data plan? Can I download an app and avoid the $20 tethering fee too?
Unfortunately, the answer to this question is no. Verizon says that customers under the unlimited plan are required by the company's terms of service to pay an additional fee to tether their device.

[newyork4me]

Whew! I guess we should all feel honored that you grace us with your presence.

In your mind perhaps but at what ultimate cost? Is there any part of this verbiage in the FCC Consent Decree that you don't understand?

Not paying for tethering on an unlimited data plan is a violation of the Terms of Services on a grandfathered unlimited data plan. I'm certainly not saying Verizon definitely will do anything to those that tether without paying on unlimited data plans. But I am saying there is nothing in the FCC Consent Decree that prohibits it. And I can find at least a dozen tech writers/articles/blogs that back up what I'm saying. Can you find ONE reputable tech article or blog that backs up what you are saying? I'll be waiting.

From CNET.com:

Okay, you don't want to believe me? Fine. I don't really care. You are as wrong as wrong can be, and that isn't going to change--no matter how many times you post a poorly reasoned, ill-informed response. Oh, and to give you my confidence level on this, it's the same as when I wrote this: http://www.howardforums.com/showthre...2#post14385072 And, as is blatantly obvious, that was a 100% correct.

For those who might like a little more explanation from someone who, say, hasn't been wrong yet, keep reading.

First, the order applies to all customers who can access the C-block spectrum. Here is one example of the broad language used throughout that effectuates this:

The Compliance Manual shall explain the C-Block rules that apply to Verizon Wireless, including the prohibition against denying, limiting, or restricting the ability of its customers to use the Applications of their choice on Verizon Wireless’s C-Block network, and set forth the Operating Procedures that Covered Employees shall follow to help ensure Verizon Wireless’s compliance with the C-Block rules.

What might one of those rules be again? Why, it's a:

Prohibition against denying, limiting, or restricting the ability of its customers to use the Applications of their choice on Verizon Wireless’s C-Block network

And this applies to whom?

Verizon Wireless: (i) agrees to implement within thirty (30) calendar days after the Effective Date a Compliance Plan relating to its future compliance with the C-Block rules, including the rules governing the availability and use of Third-party Applications, including Tethering Applications, by customers using Verizon Wireless’s C-Block Network

Do you see anything in there about tiered vs unlimited plans? Nope? Oh, that's because it doesn't exist. There is no distinction in the order.

Next, the horribly misquoted section about VZW maintaining the right to enforce their terms of service. Let's try for the full quote of this one:

To the extent permissible under the C Block Rules and other applicable law and legal obligations:
(a) nothing herein precludes Verizon Wireless from engaging in Application Store Communications relating to particular Applications that are unlawful, interfere with the operation of and/or management of Verizon Wireless’s network, harm or interfere with devices being used by Verizon Wireless customers, or otherwise are substantially harmful to Verizon Wireless
customers;

...

(d) nothing herein prejudices Verizon Wireless’s right to determine what Applications its customers are allowed to purchase through Verizon Wireless’s billing mechanisms or to take remedial actions, including termination of service, against customers who violate the terms and conditions of their service plans or Verizon Wireless’s policies applicable to the service provided to such customers.

Golly gee. It's almost like their ability to implement their TOS is subject to a modifying clause. What might that modifying clause be? Oh, that's right: subject to the C-block restrictions. Funny thing about this--I said the exact same thing in the year-ago post I linked to at the beginning of this. A private contract (the TOS) does not and cannot trump a federal enactment.

Lastly, I again point out that bloggers are neither lawyers nor well-informed individuals. They don't even realize that customers who can access the C-block spectrum are LTE device users and pay $30 for the VZW tethering service, not $20. Yea, let's rely on those bloggers.

[jamesstarks15]

Error......

[ilvla2]

End of line.

[bmtvaquero]

What I can't understand is how all these great legal minds have time to post on this website. It seems like they would be overwhelmed by their work for high dollar corporate clients, or clerking for the Supreme Court.

I've always thought that the best debaters were those who could see the point of their opponent. That is clearly not happening here.

I guess we'll all know in a few months who was right and who was wrong, then another group will be saying "I told you so".

[Sam73065]

What I can't understand is how all these great legal minds have time to post on this website. It seems like they would be overwhelmed by their work for high dollar corporate clients, or clerking for the Supreme Court.

I've always thought that the best debaters were those who could see the point of their opponent. That is clearly not happening here.

I guess we'll all know in a few months who was right and who was wrong, then another group will be saying "I told you so".

Actually that's my point, I don't see anything that directly prohibits Verizon from charging for tethering. I do see Verizon being prohibited from blocking their customers from using 3rd party tethering apps. I also see that Verizon has 30 days to implement the terms of this settlement and clarify to their employees the new policies. In 30 days or so, we'll have a clearer picture over Verizon's response to this settlement letter. Until such time, it's purely speculation over how Verizon is going to treat tethering.