On Feb 6, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Roland Perry wrote: > In article <85d304ba-6c4e-4b86-9717-2adb542b8...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong > <o...@delong.com> writes > >>> Part of the problem is knowing in advance what ISPs will and won't do. It's >>> all very well saying one shouldn't patronise an ISP that blocks port 25, >>> for example, but where is that documented before you buy? >>> >> If they don't document partial internet access blockage in the contract and >> the contract says they are providing internet access, then, they are in >> breach and you are free to depart without a termination fee and in most >> cases, demand a refund for service to date. > > You may be right about enforcing that in the USA (is it an FCC thing?), but > it won't fly in most other places. > It has worked for me so far in several countries.
No, it's not an FCC thing, it's called "Truth in advertising" and/or Fraud. If you advertise a product as internet access, then, providing limited or partial access to the internet does not fulfill the terms of the contract unless you have the appropriate disclaimers. >> Admittedly, I'm not over-fussed about email on my phone and I don't use >> a tether device at this point. > > The 3G I'm discussing is a dongle intended for general access. > As I said, I don't use a tether device (the dongle would qualify as a tether device in my meaning). >> I mostly expect 3G and 4G networks to be broken internet anyway. I was more >> speaking in terms of land-line providers. > > Apparently there are something like three times as many people with mobile > phones in the world, as with Internet access. And a lot of network expansion > is expected to be based on mobile connectivity as a result. While this is true, for whatever unfortunate reasons, those users seem to expect and accept a certain level of brokenness in their internet access. When I looked into the mobile contracts I have (SPRINT 4G/EVDO service for my phone and AT&T 3G service on my iPad), it was pretty clear that they promised to provide whatever they felt like under whatever circumstances they chose and I was supposed to pay whether it works or not. Unfortunately, lacking viable alternatives, we live with that, but, at least in their case, the contract specifies that I accept brokenness as built in to their service models. Owen
