Re:AT&T to pay $60M over U.S. allegations it lied in 'unlimi...
by jbarberu on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @03:56PM
(#21456588)
Looking at ARN's past judgements, there doesn't seem to be any restrictions on marketing "unlimited data" plans with throttling in Sweden, as long as that's in the contract. There was one case in 2011 where the consumer was awarded a victory as the contract only said unlimited data and nothing about throttling.
Re:AT&T to pay $60M over U.S. allegations it lied in 'unlimi...
by Spivak on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @04:55PM
(#21457143)
Can a service ever offer unlimited data when there is a hard cap on the amount you could download 24/7?
Does it really matter if they change their branding to be unmetered rather than unlimited?
Re:AT&T to pay $60M over U.S. allegations it lied in 'unlimi...
by JohnFen on Tuesday November 05, 2019 @06:25PM
(#21457984)
> Can a service ever offer unlimited data when there is a hard cap on the amount you could download 24/7?
No, not honestly.
There is a natural "hard cap", though. If you're paying for a certain speed, then the natural limit would be however much data you can pump at that speed over a set period of time.
I think it would be fair to call that "unlimited", in the sense that the service provider would not be imposing an artificial lower limit from what physics allows.
If a service provider isn't allowing that, then it's hard to see how they can characterize a service as "unlimited" without it being an outright lie.
I seem to recall that something similar as this case happened in Sweden (10+ years ago?), where a operator was forced to not claim "unlimited data" unless it truly is unlimited and without throttling, but I can't find any references to this right now...