Complaint Filed with the FCC Over Verizon 4G LTE Tethering


An organization going by the name Free Press isn’t too happy with Verizon’s decision to block tethering functionality in their hot new 4G LTE handsets, and they are taking their gripe to the FCC. The group filed a complaint against Verizon, saying their policies go against FCC rules giving subscribers the freedom to use the devices, applications, and services of their choosing. We had previously seen the policy brought up in discussions related to jailbroken iPhones and rooted Android devices and their deployment on networks other than those originally intended.

Free Press says Verizon customers already “pay through the nose” for their 4G LTE service, and they should be able to use the bandwidth in any way they want. The complaint has some merit, but it is treading in murky territory. At some point, Verizon has to be able to regulate the broadband they sell, so where is the happy medium? The FCC’s response is eagerly awaited, to say the least.

[via MobileCrunch]

Kevin Krause
Pretty soon you'll know a lot about Kevin because his biography will actually be filled in!

FCC Gets a Look at the Sony S1 Tablet

Previous article

T-Mobile G2 Nearing End of Life?

Next article

You may also like


  1. Carriers really trying to have it both ways… I know they want to limit congestion on their network, but capping data AND charging extra for tethering is a joke.

    1. But Verizon doesnt cap.

        1. That article is so full of innaccuracies, it is hillarious. There is NO cap on Verizon. “5 Gig allotment”? I routinely cross 10 gigs. They do however “reserve the right to throttle the TOP 5% of users”.

          Edit, they are talking about modems in that article, not phones. Phones have unlimited.

          1. Do you even KNOW what caps and throttling means? Or are you too busy are your knees under all the execs desks at Verizon? You’re gonna be crying all those cum-stains away once they get rid of their unlimited plans.

          2. I know what caps and throttling mean. They just DONT happen on Verizon. I am not capped, I routinely go over 10 gigs a month, and have hit 20. NEVER been slowed down ONCE. Crying the cum stains away? Not only is that an immature statement, it is completely wrong. As I will be grandfathered in. MY unlimited will always be there.

          3. Yeah, I definitely have my gripes with Verizon on certain things, but it seems as though people are really reading what they want to read here and what is actually being written. NIsme is grandfathered in, meaning when verizon goes to a tiered data plan, he will still have his unlimited; your attempt to appeal to emotion probably wasn’t very effective. So… that combined with your flagrant use of schoolyard “potty-talk” has kindof lowered your validity in my opinion. I believe this is called a verbal fallacy…. but it has been a couple of semesters since I took my psych 303 class… lol

          4. and not* what is actually being written

          5. Nisme, you have no objectivity whatsoever! I am convinced you work for Verizon wireless because you are constantly trying to sell their overpriced product and your excuses are the same bs hype their advertising wants idiots like you to believe. They should have a channel on their vcast( or whatever they call it) for people like you. They can just show VZ commercials and propaganda 24/7. Boy wouldnt you love that!

        1. Again, that is not for phones. Rather USB modems.

          1. ” Published 18 days ago – The days of unlimited data at Verizon will soon be over, the company said during the Reuters Global Technology Summit this week. Verizon CFO Fran Shammo confirmed that Verizon would make good on its promise to ditch its $30 unlimited data plan option this summer, and tried to soften the bad news by saying the company was planning to roll out “family” data plans that could be shared among several devices.”


          2. So, what they are going to offer IN THE FUTURE, has anything to do with what they offer now? And, just like any network, those that have it now, will be grandfathered in.

      1. How many times you gonna repeat that, they do throttle which is not truly “unlimited”, dont spin every criticism of your beloved Verizon to try and make them look good…they have enough PAID PR guys doing that. They spend millions in advertising, maybe you can get a job there?

        1. They DONT throttle. They reserve the right too. I routinely go over 10 gigs, been over 20 gigs. Never ONCE was there a slow down. Your just a troll. Your name says as much.

  2. Complain before you sign the contract, not after.

    1. the point is there is a good argument that Verizon shouldn’t be able to put that into your contract as a matter of public policy. Just as your landline company can’t limit you to what device you attach to the network.  And, as a history lesson, that wasn’t always the case.  It had to be argued.  And eventually through FCC rulings and subsequent court rulings it was held that landline companines (AT&T) could not limit what was attached to their network, provided the attached device wasn’t interfering with the network.  This is quite analogous. 

      1. You make a valid point, but what moves like this are going to do is force the hand of Verizon to move quicker towards tiered data pricing and data throttling. The large companies are going to always find a way to protect their investment, so keep challenging them and you will keep seeing prices go up.

        1. Agree I mean I wish verizon would grandfather us in but the more and more people illegal tether and use a ton of data hurts us all with tiered pricing. i hope when they do go to tiered if they dont grandfather that one tier is like 3 gb for $25 to compete with at&t because if the highest tier is lower than that I will begin looking to other carriers.

        2. They might using a tiering/throttling. But they shouldn’t be doing both tiering/throttling AND limiting the devices you feed data to via tethering..  If you pay for X amount of data each month (at Y speed) than you should be allowed to use X amount of data each month in anyway you see fit.  I’m actually not completely against anti-tethering policies provided they are using that as a way to make sure their resources aren’t depleted.  But that’s not what is going on here.  The tiered data plans already accomplish that.  There is one aspect about FCC law which lets companies institute policies such as the one above. Its known as the “reasonable network management” exception.  The problem is since tiering is already in place its hard to make a case that anti-tethering is reasonable network management. Verizon is wanting two bites at the apple here.  This is why I think the challenge is a meritorious one and it has a reasonable chance of success. 

          1. There is no tiered data.

          2. here was already a statement made verizon’s tiered data will roll out this summer with possibly family data plans following

            *granted this is talking about iphone, but there is another article i’ve seen more recent not even mentioning the iphone with the same summer time frame for the tiered smartphone data coming

    2. Where does it say NO tethering in the contract?? Then again, have you always had the mentality of a chicken McNugget?

      1. It says you are not allowed to alter a device from the manufacturers specifications(rooting), and it also say you are not allowed to use a mechanism (app) to transmit rf signal to another device.

        1. Well good thing it isnt RF frequency. They use bluetooth or USB, many of which dont require you to alter your device either.


          1. Bluetooth is RF, USB is another story.

        2. Actually they ruled rooting is allowed and the companies can’t say you can’t root.

          1. Actually, that isnt what they ruled. Yes, it isnt illegal to root. But, the company DOES have the right to deny service.

      2. It says it right here:

        Unlimited Smartphone and BlackBerry Plans and Features 
        These WirelessEmail plans and features cannot be used: (1) for access to the Internet, intranets or other data networks except as the device’s native applications and capabilities permit, unless you subscribe to Mobile Broadband Connect; or (2) for any applications that tether your device to laptops or personal computers other than for use of the Wireless Sync or the BlackBerry solution, unless you subscribe to Mobile BroadbandConnect. 
        I reached that page by selecting a Thunderbolt, adding it to my cart, selecting a voice plan, clicking on “Unlimited Email & Web for Smartphones (personal email)” link, then clicking on “Additional Terms & Conditions” at the very bottom.

        It’s also interesting that under “Data Plans and Features: Prohibited Uses” they say:

        “We may monitor you compliance, or the compliance of other subscribers, with these terms and conditions, but we will not monitor the content of your communications except as otherwise expressly permitted or required by law”

        If they’re not monitoring the content of our communications, how are they detecting that people are tethering and the content isn’t coming from the phone itself?

        1. By “content” they mean the substantive content. As in the words and messages you are sending or reading.  Its pretty easy to monitor to what device data is coming and going without actually “reading” the data.

          1. I would think that any inspection of packets going to and from the phone would be classified as content monitoring… but we digress from the original issue that VZW stipulating conditions like these and blocking apps goes against the original terms they purchased Block C of the 700mhz spectrum with.

  3. While most of what is being said is true, “pay through their nose” isn’t entirely correct. Outside of sprints 3.7G, Verizon is the only provider with true 4G, and sprint has a $10 surcharge. Verizon doesn’t, as a matter of a fact, Verizon charges the same price for 4G as they do 3G.

    1. @iDont like applz i hate to burst ur bubble, but nobody has ture 4g…true 4g is 1Gbs which no one is even close to yet…but everyone calls it 4g, besides HSPA+ is currently faster than verizon, and once they get the 42Mbs out it will smoke everything including LTE

      1. i take that back, it won’t smoke LTE as LTE can get 50Mbs, but still close enough not to notice the difference…lol

        1. HSPA+ can/will/should continue to go far beyond 42Mbps.  Supposedly it can multiply to like 650Mbps but the question is, how long will ATT advance it?  That is if T-Mobile goes away of course.  I believe TMo will will take it beyond the 84Mbps that is planned by the end of this year.

          Of course lord knows how fast your avg. TMo subscriber will pull from that in the real world.

        2. You know it’s spelled Wiggin, not Wiggen, right?

      2. UMm, Tmobiles HSPA+ is not “currently faster” than LTE.

        1. Yes it is, do some research and quit being such a fanboy.

          1. Really. I have yet to see a single ss of 42+ mbps from hspa+. Their fastest tech isnt even on a single phone right now. I have seen hundreds FROM PHONES on Verizon, hitting as high as 47mbps. How about you do some research.

      3. Honestly, you wouldn’t know the difference between 42Mbps or 25Mbps without a speed test. Even if your network utilized 26Tbps OFDM fiber optic cables to transfer data, and you were getting Terabit-class speeds, you wouldn’t know the difference. Aside from speed test sites, how many things have you actually downloaded at 40Mbps? On the commercial, public internet, none. Other than showing off your speed test results to your friends, you really will notice no difference on your phone as no one is uploading or downloading at 42Mbps, or even 25. Most people wouldn’t notice the difference even between WiMax and LTE; if the average person streams a high quality video with no lag, they don’t care what their service is called, be it LTE, WiMax, HSPA+, etc. I’m not saying that faster and faster speeds shouldn’t be strived for and attained, but most people could care less as long as everything works as soon as you hit the button, touch the screen, etc. At this point in time, it’s nothing more than bragging rights when your speed test comes back with a 40+Mbps number. Also, most people (myself included) are more concerned with reliability than how fast ookla says your connection is. If you go out of the city, or away from a major highway, and you suddenly no longer have a connection, you are running at exactly 0bps – which isn’t doing you any good. So, if I’m stuck in the middle of nowhere, I still have a phone that I can use to call for help, instead of having my phone turned into a small tablet that I can play Angry Birds on because there is no connection of any sort.

        1. Not true, I can tell the differance how long a download takes. Maybe not streaming, but DLing, definately.

          1. You missed the point. Instead of reacting to the first sentence, read the entire post.

          2. Fanboys don’t read posts that disagree with their beliefs. All the words to him just say VERIZON 4 LYFEEE BITCHES!!!!!

          3. I read the entire post. You said as long as streaming is smooth, well I like downloading movies in half the time.

    2. at least you get true unlimited data with sprint and no threat to you for using that data.

      1. You do realize that Verizon offers “true unlimited data”, and Sprint also has it in your contract that tethering is forbidden. And their contract also states that violating it can result in termination of service.

        1. I did a comparison last month at best buy. For a single person, single line, unlimited data, voice, and text plan on Verizon with the Thunderbolt, taxes and surcharges included, it’s about $12 more a month than Sprint with an EVO (that’s INCLUDING the $10 premium data charge, which isn’t just for 4G now). Also, Verizon’s insurance is more per month and has a higher deductible, but you probably didn’t know that since you’re Mommy and Daddy probably still pay your bills. I stay with Sprint since not only are they cheaper than Verizon, but they are much, much, much more customer friendly. I can call Sprint and ask for X amount of time to pay my bill (sometimes up to a month) and they have kept my phone on, no late fees or questions asked. With Verizon, I had 5 days, take it or leave it. No lee way whatsoever. I was considering switching back, but this is the icing on the cake for me to stay with Sprint: I will not pay extra each month to be treated like shit and told what I can and cannot do with MY data.

          1. Good for you, IF Sprints network wasnt so small, I MIGHT have chosen them too. As it is, they dont have service by me. And, most of America either. According to their map, at least. And, wow, a whole $12, for a network that is twice the size, and triple the speed. Good for you, that Sprint allows you to pay your bills LATE, whoopy. and no, “mommy and daddy” dont pay my bills. And, unlike you, my bills are paid ON TIME.

  4. They already regulate it by setting caps so it should be the customer’s choice to use that bandwidth as they see fit.

    1. Again, no cap on Verizon.

      1. Nisme loves Verizon….

        1. Troll

        2. looks like someone got hit with a $400 deposit required from verizon..

          dood .. there’s no cap on verizon’s data plan for phone atm. only cap is on usb sticks and hotspots.

          verizon reservce the right to throttling of the top 5% of users. not anyone who goes over 5gb. you’re mixing it up with sprint and tmobile.

          tmobile has plans with cheaper rates with unlimited data that is throttle capped. meaning they can use as much as they want but base on their plan, they get throttled after X amount of gb usage.

          sprint has unlimited data plan but reservce the right to throttole everyone. not saying sprint has enacted that right but it says so on their disclaimer.

          before you start sounding like dickrell .. you should really go and do some research.

  5. I have to agree with Free Press in the filing of the complaint. But, this should have been filed against ANY and ALL service providers who choose to block tethering. Why should anyone have to pay more when you have unlimited data. It’s the same data and same access. Verizon and AT&T, amongst others, should seriously examine the ramifications to both themselves AND their customers. I know I will be watching this very closely.

  6. @iDont like applz i hate to burst ur bubble, but nobody has ture 4g…true 4g is 1Gbs which no one is even close to yet…but everyone calls it 4g, besides HSPA+ is currently faster than verizon, and once they get the 42Mbs out it will smoke everything including LTE

  7. The FCC has no role in this. Verizon is selling its product, and the consumer agrees to the terms. If the consumer does not consent to the terms, then he/she should not buy Verizon’s service.

    1. if you think that then you don’t understand the function of the FCC or the nature of telecommunications. Will the FCC do anything? Probably not.  Could they? Yes.  Verizon doesn’t operate in a pure market system.  Where did they get the spectrum they use???  Its only because of the FCC  that they can use their spectrum. Because of that grant there are certain things that Verizon must (or at least should) do in return.  Part of that is not using their oligopoly to unfairly squeeze consumers.  Verizon is making their technology LESS capable in order to squeeze out more money.  I’m not predicting that the FCC will do anything as Verizon/AT&T has near control of the FCC.  But I am saying that you’re simply wrong if you don’t think the FCC has any role in this.  There is a very robust case history relating to the FCC’s role in what consumers can do with voice/data service at the end of the network.

      1. I am only going to comment on one part of this. “unfairly squeeze customers”. Well, if you think having a mobile internet connection, that is comparable in speed to cable internet, at half the cost, is “unfairly squeezing customers”, maybe you should complain about the prices the cable providers charge first.

        1. You are such a verizon fanboy! please stfu, its so annoying reading your bs….

          1. So dont read what I write. Or counter my “bs”. Troll.

          2. Anyone who reads this can see you do nothing except praise Verizon! It is scary how you prop them up. Guess maybe you just want to see Ivan get a few more yachts….

          3. I have listed the cons of Verizon more then once. I just happen to stand by the fact that their cons(price, lackluster phones), are outweighed by their pros(network).

        2. Comparable price? 
          lets see..

          My monthly cable prices are $40 for 10mbs down and 5mbs up and $7 for phone service… Everything is unlimited for $47 + taxes.  There’s also no limit on what I can use the data for or what I hook up behind the cable modem.

          Wireless companies billing… Well, you know.. You’re not going to pay less then $70 + taxes, for post paid, regardless of carrier. 

          As for the cost of providing the services, I don’t know, but data costs must be the same or very similar for wired and wireless broadband.  Plus, once a cell site is up, it’s up, just as if a head-end/wires to the premise of a cable company is put in, it’s in. Upgrading or maintenance might be more for the wireless, but it can’t be so much more that wireless costs are 50% + higher then a wired broadband provider with wireless trying to charge even more for things wired companies allow for no addition costs…  You know, like hooking up more then one device to the connection.

          If I had to look into my crystal ball, I’d say, that wireless will eventually come down to compete with wired for home usage.  It’s just the way competition works, unless the FCC allows the ATT/TMO merger then to allow more consolidation in the industry….

          1. My cable is $50/month, and the PHONE isnt inlcuded. BTW, if you compare your SLOW internet, then that is Apples to Oranges.

          2. So if you’re paying $50 and getting much faster speeds, then the price for LTE 4G should be much better then what Verizon is currently offering.

            I gave the price I’m paying to show what $47/month gets me.  I don’t think Verizon’s 4G LTE service is much faster on a regular bases, but it’s way more expensive. 

            Again, if you’re getting better speeds for $50, it only makes my point that wireless broadband is way over priced.

          3. How, it is half the cost and double the speed of my LANDLINE, where I am tied down to a SINGLE location. I actually see value in something that is twice as fast, and able to be taken other places. For HALF the cost, no less.

          4. and what you don’t understand is that Verizon is a MOBILE service. You try to get your cable company to offer you MOBILE internet and MOBILE phone for 47/mo.

            Hence why your HOME internet and HOME phone is cheaper is that it’s HOME use only. Limitation of HOME phone and internet is that you can only use it at HOME … not MOBILE.

            Limitation of MOBILE is that it cost more for that freedom.

            You sound like those stupid ass people who wants a brand new mercedes for a ford pinto price.

            On top of that .. do you even know how to compare??

            How the f you gonna compare a HOME service to a MOBILE service’s price?

      2. The FCC has the right to investigate this, considering the past with AT&T, Cable TV, etc, mentioned above.  I suspect Orangepickel is one of those dreamers who believes in a “Pure Free Market”, with no government oversight at all.  It’s always been amusing to me that those folks don’t realize their Utopian ideal is as utterly unworkable as those starry eyed dreamers still waiting for “True Communism” to work. 

      3. The spectrum does not belong to the government, and Verizon is not threatening our safety (or lying to consumers). Therefore, the FCC has no power over what Verizon does.

        1. The FCC does not “own” the spectrum, but they have the legal right to apportion and regulate it.  It’s a shame for you, but just because you don’t want it to be true does not overturn decades of precedent.  

    2. When Verizon licensed a piece of the spectrum, they made an agreement to permit certain uses with the product they licensed. FCC’s agreement with Verizon trumps my agreement with Verizon, if they conflict, the policies from FCC’s agreement win, just like if a TOS breaks the law, users should ignore that portion of the TOS and comply with the law.

  8. This is a rutile effort. Still, I wish them the best of luck. It’s our data and we want it now!!!! (Said in the voice of those “It’s my money and I need it now!” commercials)

    1. Edit: Futile.

  9. i take that back, it won’t smoke LTE as LTE can get 50Mbs, but still close enough not to notice the difference…lol

  10. I bet they un-block it once the limited data plans are forced on us.

    I already know this thread is going to be full of “Well, you signed a contract that says…”, and, “I’m already paying for it, it’s none of their business where it goes…”-type posts. However, that aside, if they are throttling after x GB of data, the argument does have some merit (I did say *some*, so save the “You signed a contract that states…” responses, this is only a perspective, not the start of a debate). The reason I think it has some merit is that, some people, after finding out how fast LTE is, decided to tether everything in the house, and, in some cases, thought of getting rid of their home ISP altogether – which is blatant abuse of the network. However, if VZW is throttling, then it’s on you if you suck up all of your data in a day or two because you wanted to run your phone, computer, laptop, xbox360, ps3, and blu-ray player to stream netflix. I don’t know how long this will last anyway, as there already have been legal parallels such as using a router in your house, how many TVs are hooked up to the cable connection, etc. On one hand, yes, VZW customers do pay a premium for their service – not far off from what I pay for my home ISP – however, they are different networks, and you’re also paying for mobility, and most people aren’t taking their cable modems with them and sharing data connection with their friends if they don’t have any. I’m sure the “regular” ISPs wouldn’t be very thrilled at that prospect. I’m not saying one is right and the other isn’t, I am simply stating a perspective. Personally, I’d love to have unlimited, unthrottled data, but aside from rooting, and using dethrottling scripts, etc. I don’t see it happening anytime soon, unless a miracle occurs.

    1. But, they dont throttle after X GB of data.

      1. True, I haven’t heard of anyone being throttled yet. However, they are also still doing the free tethering promotion, so it wouldn’t go over very well if they gave free tethering away, which, of course everyone is going to use – then throttle you. Not good marketing at all. I hope it stays the way it is, that’d be great, but I doubt it will. I hope I’m wrong. As always, time will tell.

        1. The part of your contract that states when throttling occurs doesnt mention ANY amount of GB’s. Rather, the “top 5% of users”.

          1. Very astute, you’ve read your contract as well. They throttle the top 5% of users, which is an arbitrary number, hence the “x” GB. This is known as a variable. I know for a fact that the top 5% aren’t using less than 1GB, so I posted “x GB”, where “x” is the number of GB the top 5% use. I assumed that everyone already knows that it states in VZW’s contracts that they may throttle you if you are in the “top 5%”. I thought I was being clear. Again; this isn’t a debate, and I’m not defending a doctoral dissertation – I was simply stating a perspective on the matter – nothing more.

          2. I am just putting it out there, they “reserve the right”, I am pretty sure my 10 gigs a month puts me in that 5%, and I have yet to be throttled.

          3. nisme .. i doubt you’re part of the top 5% using only 10gigs. i normally go over 5gig and i dont do much on my phone. you’re maybe mid pack.

  12. i hardly use tethering, i found it useless…

    1. I find your post to be completely useless.

  13. One has to wonder, if this works, will people then sue over the bloatware issue.  It’s not a dissimilar issue as when Microsoft got sued for people being unable to remove Internet Explorer. (Although- in that case IE was built into the OS.  In this case, they’re mostly annoying and possibly a performance drain)  But the basic truth that they were deciding what software we should have on a device we purchase and not giving us a choice sounds the same. 

    1. I’d love to see that happen. Of course, it would most likely mean higher initial phone prices…

      1. Just like allowing tethering would result in higher data costs.

  14. To me this is like the whole jailbreak/root issue. There was an attempt to make jaibreak/rooting illegal, which failed. However the providers can deny those phones from their service. People like to root their phone make changes, install unauthorized software ext. They end up screwing up the phone to where it does not work right on the network or brick it. Than they expect the the provider to repair or replace the phone for free.

    1. Bricking is really hard to do…with sbf now

      1. Not only that, Rooting/Jailbreaking voids the warranty, which makes the customer spend MORE money to replace the phone if something does go awry. If anything, the providers should be encouraging this, as it can ultimately make them more money.

  15. “At some point, Verizon has to be able to regulate the broadband they sell, so where is the happy medium?”

    WRONG.  Verizon sells a connection to the internet.  They can choose to limit the throughput, but they cannot limit the content so long as they advertise the phone as providing ‘internet access’ because the definition of internet access is regulated by the FCC.  Kevin Krause, your words put you dangerously close to being on the wrong side of the net neutrality debate.  I’m not interested in a “fan blog” that shills for mega-corporations in the telecom industry.  Get your shit straight.

  16. Quick Tethering Quiz.

    Which costs AT&T more and which puts more stress on their network:
    1. A 1 kilobyte packet transmitted between my phone and the tower.
    2. A 1 kilobyte packet transmitted between my phone and the tower.
    (Please note in the case of (1) the packet was from my mobile browser, and in the case of (2) the packet was from my laptop browser.)

    If I have a 2 GB monthly data limit, which of the following activities will use more data on the network:
    1. Downloading 2 GB of data to my mobile phone?
    2. Downloading 2 GB of data to my laptop?

    1. The theory is, you only use so much data on the mobile. It is a small screen, and not too many people browse the web for hours on end. Now, on the computer, that is a differant story. People tend to do a LOT more on their computer. The pricing is based on how much data the average user, uses on their phone. Wich, is a far less amount than the amount used by the average user on their pc, laptop, xbox, ps3, psp, wii,….But, you are talking about AT&T, I can agree, that when there is a hard cap, the carrier cant justify how you use it.

      1. You seem to completely miss the point.

        If I paid for 2 GB, then I can use up to 2 GB.  Which device or screen I use it on makes no difference.  I’m still using only 2 GB.

        If you are talking about an unlimited data plan, then I think you may have a point.  However unlimited really should mean unlimited.  If they don’t mean that, then don’t sell that.  Instead sell whatever is the upper cap they prefer.  Just be honest.  If they don’t want me going over, say, 8 GB, then don’t sell me an “unlimited” plan, sell me an 8 GB plan.

        Charging me for unlimited, and then for tethering is just as unfair to me as if I used tethering (without paying a separate fee) on an unlimited plan.  So either way someone (me or the carrier) gets screwed.  Metering data and not charging for tethering seems fair to everyone.  Mobile data is an expensive and scarce resource.  Charging Mr. Data Hog for how much he uses also seems fair.

        That seems simple enough.

  17. I have an interesting situation. My water utility sells me metered water for washing dishes, watering the lawn, showering, and other limited purposes.

    The utility offers a Tasting plan for an additional monthly charge. Under this plan, I am allowed to use the water also for cooking and drinking. (Even though my water use is metered, and each gallon of water for cooking and drinking is delivered by the same pipes!)

    Dear customer: our records indicate that you have been using water for cooking and/or drinking. Please upgrade your water rate plan to our convenient Tasting plan that allows for this usage. If you continue to use water for cooking and drinking, you will be signed up for the Tasting plan automatically.

    I think the Tasting plan is just a fee that they made up. It isn’t a service they provide. They just want more money from me. I’ve got a workaround of using a container to obtain water from another room for the purposes of cooking and drinking.

    Some people shout: Theft of service!
    But what service? They’re already delivering water to me, and metering it, and I’m paying for it, and its delivered by the same pipes!

    Some people shout: but you signed an agreement and using the water for cooking and drinking is a breach of that agreement!
    Ask a lawyer about the term “unconscionable contract”.
    Nobody in their right mind would agree to this if they had any actual choice in the matter. Just because they have the power and can force you into paying this ridiculous fee or doing without doesn’t make it right.

    I say that this Tasting “service” is no service at all, it’s just a fee for delivering nothing at all extra to me. It’s a case of the utility wanting something for nothing. Yet people seem to think it is somehow wrong to use the water I’m paying for for drinking or cooking unless I sign up for the more expensive Tasting plan.

    In order to add legitimacy to their Tasting plan, the water company says that the Tasting plan is actually delivering something: it includes an additional 2 Gigabytes of water per month, giving you 4 total Gigabytes of water.

    But what if I only need 2 Gigabytes of water and therefore my existing monthly 2 Gigabyte plan is plenty? The water company already charges $10 per extra Gigabyte of water I use over the limit. So if I used excess water, it’s not like they wouldn’t get paid.

    Furthermore, once I sign up for the Tasting plan, they don’t make any distinction between water used for drinking/cooking and water used for other purposes. I could use 3/4 of it for tasting, and 1/4 for bathing/dishwashing. Or any other split. Or all of it purely for tasting. So then if I paid for Tasting and used only 2 Gigabytes of water, which I already had paid for, then why did I need the Tasting plan?

    I seem to be very confused about stealing water for tasting. Someone please set me straight. 

    1. The thing is, verizons data is NOT metered. How about, your water company offers unlimited water to your house. Do you then have the right to hook your whole neighborhood to YOUR connection?

      1. If everyone on you’re block happens to be on your property, then yes. It’s not like everyone is opening up internet cafes and using their phone as the router. Most of these people are using it for their laptop/tab/ipad on the go. Yeah, getting rid of your home internet to power EVERYTHING with a Thunderbolt is kinda unfair to Verizon, but so what? For the absolutely miniscule amount of people “ripping them off” they will make back 10 fold within 3 minutes from another customers account.

        1. okay, so say YOU have 3 houses on your property. All 3 have different addresses. Should the “unlimited” plan, that is INTENDED for use at ONE residence be open to all your other houses? Even though, that “unlimited” plan is priced accordingly, for ONE residence?

      2. My argument was based on the premise of metered water, not unlimited.  I can understand an argument to charge for tethering if you have unlimited data.  When a network operator charges you by the gallon, then they really don’t have a good argument for charging you for tethering.

    2. The tethering quiz and water tasting were okay the first time. This is at least the third, I think fourth time you posted it. We get it. We don’t need to see it everytime an article about tethering is written. We get it.

      1. Especially since it doesnt fit. AT ALL.

        1.  Please explain how it doesn’t fit?  Don’t just assert that it doesn’t.  In other forums, plenty of people have said it fits so well, which I agree with.

      2.  I’m happy you get it.  There are people who don’t get it.  The practice of charging for tethering continues.  People who support separate charges for tethering give the same arguments every time it comes up.  So what’s the problem?

  18. How about this DICK: if you don’t have anything constructive or meaningful to say, just don’t say anything. Besides, I thought you were leaving this “dumb” website since you have “much better places to go”? Or were you just lying out of your ass, AGAIN?

  19. @DannyB2:disqus 
    The term you want is “adhesion contract,” not “unconscionable contract.” Then again, some might consider it unconscionable as well.

    1. Thank you.

  20. You said: . At some point,Verizon has to be able to regulate the broadband they sell, so where is the happy medium?
    Absolutly not… we purchase data from a carrier just like we purchase gas from a gas station. Its not the gas stations job to limit what cars we put the gas in, once we buy it, it is ours. Let the govetment limit legal issues and keep the carriers 100% out of it. If they wanna charge tiered data fine.. but that data we do buy is ours! If we torrent or netflix that’s our business, if they sold unlimited that would be different but they do not.

    1. Before anyone mentions that they still have unlimited, get a life. That’s public knowledge its going and you honestly expect this tethering block is just for that short time until tiered is up and running?

      1. Considering I will be grandfathered in. It isnt going anywhere for me.

    2. So, where is this gas station that offers unlimited gas? I could really use some of that. Considering, that is all you can get now, unlimited.

  21. “At some point, Verizon has to be able to regulate the broadband they sell”

    I guess it comes down to do you have the right to use the bandwidth you buy from Verizon sells how you want to, or does the ISP (Verizon) have the right to dictate how you use it 

  22. “At some point, Verizon has to be able to regulate the broadband they sell”

    I guess it comes down to do you have the right to use the bandwidth you
    buy from Verizon how you want to, or does the ISP (Verizon) have
    the right to dictate how you use it 

  23. I would say Verizon’s network is a lot less useless than Sprints. Considering it is twice as large, and 3 times as fast.

  24. @1fa02fa30f78a5105ee7af7c5280d679:disqus Yeah…. I have some gripes with verizon… But i have to agree with NIsme on some things. People on here are tending to read what they want to read and not what is actually being written. Taking away the unlimited plans will NOT take away NIsme’s plan, he will be grandfathered in….. so… yeah…. I dunno about using that to get an emotional reaction from him, plus, the flagrant use of schoolyard insults kindof lowers your legitimacy and validity. I believe that is called a verbal fallacy, but I might be wrong, my psych 303 class was a couple of semesters ago :)

  25. @1fa02fa30f78a5105ee7af7c5280d679:disqus Yeah, I definitely have my gripes with Verizon on certain things, but it seems as though people are really reading what they want to read here and what is actually being written. NIsme is grandfathered in, meaning when verizon goes to a tiered data plan, he will still have his unlimited; your attempt to appeal to emotion probably wasn’t very effective. So… that combined with your flagrant use of schoolyard “potty-talk” has kindof lowered your validity in my opinion. I believe this is called a verbal fallacy…. but it has been a couple of semesters since I took my psych 303 class… lol

  26. and NOT what is actually being written*

  27. I could be wrong but T-mobile is looking better and better ($79.00 unlimited plan, with caps). We will have to see what AT&T will do with them. I am to a Verizon customer paying through the nose. 

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in News