alalperPremium
join:2000-08-20
Philadelphia, PA | It appears to me that . . . . . . . while caps on the amount of downloads or uploads is not, in itself, a bad thing, there are certainly some legal ramifications to them when there is no published (or even available) documentation as to what these caps actually are.
It would seem that a class action lawsuit based on 1) false advertising (unlimited really means limited), 2) unenforcable clauses in the contract (tos) where the tos is too vague to be legally binding and/or 3) unenforcable clauses in the contract due to the fact that a party cannot legally be bound to portions of an agreement that are totally unilateral, would stand a very high chance of success.
The class here would be huge (how many Comcast customers are there?) and could be a huge money maker for some game law firm willing to front the costs.
While Comcast may have the money to fight such a suit, just the very REAL threat of such a suit going forward and what such a suit would cost them, both monetarily and in bad PR, would probably force them to either 1) make unlimited mean unlimited or 2) get rid of references to unlimited in their advertising and set published hard caps in their TOS.
Just my opinion from a non-legal mind.
Al |
|
| Just keep reading the TOS, you will find that IF YOU HAVE THE SERVICE, CABLE TV, OR INTERNET, YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO BE A PART OF A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT... Keep trying.... |
|
alalperPremium
join:2000-08-20
Philadelphia, PA | said by phattieg:
Just keep reading the TOS, you will find that IF YOU HAVE THE SERVICE, CABLE TV, OR INTERNET, YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO BE A PART OF A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT... Keep trying....
Do you think that might also be an unenforceable provision? It's like a clause in a contract stating, "if we break the contract, you have no rights to sue to enforce specific performance under the terms of the contract that we broke."
That is a unilateral provision and is probably unenforceable on its face.
Any attorneys here that would like to discuss this?
Al |
|
 hambone6666Sigmarick Said Arse
join:2001-02-13
Stamford, CT | reply to alalper
but is they shut you off, then you dont 'have' their service any more.
doesnt that now make that contract null/void. is there something in the TOS that says, you are bound to this contract for x months/years AFTER you are terminated?
no contract, let the lawyers/attorney generals loose.
--
"That vulnerability is completely theoretical." - Microsoft Technical Support |
|
|
|
alalperPremium
join:2000-08-20
Philadelphia, PA | They can still be sued for specific performance under the contract that they cancelled.
They can also be sued for canceling an unlimited account based on limits.
They can also be sued for false advertising.
Al |
|
hambone6666Sigmarick Said Arse
join:2001-02-13
Stamford, CT | reply to alalper
I can just hear the judge now,
"So, tell me again what DID you exactly mean when you said unlimited?"
case closed, in favor of plantiff. GO GET EM!!!
I think unless they can prove that his downloading so much data actually put their network at risk.
--
"That vulnerability is completely theoretical." - Microsoft Technical Support |
|
| reply to alalper
is not a strain on their network as far as I can tell, it is more like," we are sick of you using more bandwidth then others!!!"  |
|
| Regardless of the contract, I believe most states have some form of consumer-protection agency that looks into cases of fraud or problematic agreements. In such instances, the states are acting on behalf of the citizens at large, and are therefore not bound by any contracts agreed to by individuals.
The proper tact to take, IMO, is to make copies of all of the threads in here, regarding this issue, write a nice cover-letter about why you think Comcast is ripping off the citizens of YOUR state, and then get as many people as possible to sign a petition for the state to investigate the matter... and send everything to your state agency in charge of protecting consumers against fraud.
Since these cable companies operate over state lines, I figure a similar complaint can also be lodged with the Federal agency in charge of protecting consumers from fraud.
Really, when you get right down to it, this entire situation is a case of false advertising and fraud. If a company advertises a service as being "unlimited" but they enforce some kind of cap on that service... they are breaking the law. |
|
| reply to alalper
Please. This is really simple.
1) Comcast advertises unlimited service. You can apparently call them on the phone and they will tell you as much.
2) Some people are disconnected for exceeding a secret limit.
Looks like a slam-dunk to me. Calling all lawyers...
--
We must destroy liberty to make the homeland safe for democracy |
|
