sholling
Premium
join:2002-02-13
Hemet, CA
1 edit | reply to Thasp_without_post_w
Re: Wow, what a piece of trash!
The PLEASE bend me over apologists crowd here still amazes me. No fraud is too outrageous for them they just want to pay and pay. I like to think of them as the "just because they advertise unlimited doesn't mean unlimited" - please screw me deeper group... This is the group used care salesmen love. Yup we promised to sell you a 2003 Corvette for $15,000... but oops we forgot to tell you about the $35,000 charge for waxing the car... lol. Pay up it's on page 143 of the TOS. lol. Any of you fools want to buy Bic pens for $1 please read the fine print (yeah right) only $300 each for S&H... lol!!!!!!
IMHO those TOS are going to be trumped every time by the advertised price. What these clowns count on is those idiots (see the forum for glaring examples) that just can't wait to get bent over! LOL.
--
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
--FREDERIC BASTIAT--
|
|
sholling
Premium
join:2002-02-13
Hemet, CA
2 edits | reply to elisjourney
said by elisjourney  :This sort of situation is why the Republican Congress has it soooo wrong about eliminating/reducing class action cases. Obviously it would not be worthwhile for an attorney to bring a case for a single consumer who has been defrauded by the VOIP providers advertising "unlimited" residential service but if you aggregate enough of these claims it would be financially feasible and the VOIP scumbags would feel the pain. You know I don't totally disagree with you. The problem they faced was that trial shysters and their brother and sister shysters on the bench had so thoroughly crapped all over the system that something had to be done. It had become a system by, of, and exclusively for the lawyers... My first choice was loser pays. That's what England uses and it works to keep the junk suits out of the system. File a suit and lose because it shouldn't have been filed in the first place and you reimburse the victim of the suit all their costs.
Here we've had juries with sub-room temp IQs award millions in pure junk class action suits. Silicone implants being a perfect example. ZERO evidence but oh my she's feeling awful so let's give the poor hypochondriac millions in free money just so we feel good - after all its somebody else's free money... Pay up folks because bottom line you pay for it...
--
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
--FREDERIC BASTIAT--
|
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| reply to Matt
First companies need to stop advertising unlimited if they are going to set excessive usage limits. Then to rebut what you said.
How does it make more sense if he was on the phone 1150 minutes a day? If that was the case people would probably agree that his phone use is excessive. This article makes sense because its criticizing a VoIP company saying 38 minutes a day is excessive. Of course any normal person isn't going to agree that 38 minutes a day is excessive. I would go so far as to say no company should try to consider any usage excessive until it goes above 4 hours a day. And even so when that happens they need to set something up where a user pays double, and gets double that. Most companies solutions end up being a higher priced plan that doesn't even contain as many minutes as their excessive usage threshold. But I reiterate, no company really has the right to make an excessive usage cap if they continue to advertise unlimited usage. |
|
mph300
Two Thirds The Way There
join:2000-11-09
| reply to Dezbend
said by Dezbend:
Quoting this definition makes no sense. A company can not sell an infinite of usage in a finite amount of time. The definition is meaningless in context. We need to discover what the industry considers to be unlimited to understand the claim. I don't think that unlimited is yet an industry term for VoIP - this and cases like it will determine what is meant by unlimited in this context.
It makes perfect sense. If the word or words they are using don't fit the usage they describe, then it becomes false advertising. We as consumers don't need a grammar lesson(I think it's safe to say that most people understand what unlimited means). The industry needs to learn what a word actually means before trying to entice people with certain words and then cover themselves with a security blanket terms of service that is rediculous! If you purchased a gym membership that was "unlimited usage" and then found out that you could only use the gym for 1 hour a week, would that be ok too? I don't think so! The same goes for an unlimited voip phone service that only provides you with LIMITED phone service! |
|
Dezbend
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-20
| When you bought high speed internet; what speed did you get? The industry sells speeds like 512k/sec or 1.5Meg/sec 3.0Meg/sec does it bother you that those advertised "speeds" are a measurement of volume not velocity?
There exist industry terms. Maybe there aught not to be, or maybe Webster needs to put more entries under these words. Whatever the case we deal with an evolving language were the meaning of words must be considered in context.
A box can not contain infinitely many apples, nor can a month contain infinitely many minutes. It would be foolish to believe otherwise.
--
If it is not recorded, it simply does not exist. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | said by Dezbend :When you bought high speed internet; what speed did you get? The industry sells speeds like 512k/sec or 1.5Meg/sec 3.0Meg/sec does it bother you that those advertised "speeds" are a measurement of volume not velocity? Mine is advertised and sold as a range of bitrates, and I am happily sitting at the very top of that range (6016/608), and the company will let you drop to the next lower plan if they can't hit the minimum they advertise.said by Dezbend :There exist industry terms. Maybe there aught not to be, or maybe Webster needs to put more entries under these words. Whatever the case we deal with an evolving language were the meaning of words must be considered in context. The marketing industry can use whatever terms they wish to talk to each other, but when they are talking to the buying public they'd better be using standard definitions. Advertisers certainly should not be [re-] defining words like "unlimited" in any case.said by Dezbend :A box can not contain infinitely many apples, nor can a month contain infinitely many minutes. It would be foolish to believe otherwise. Then the box manufacturer better not advertise it as having "unlimited capacity".
You keep missing the point. Unlimited in this context means no limits are imposed by the company. It does not mean there are no limits imposed by virtue of the number of total minutes in a month. There are natural limits imposed by ma nature and her henchmen, and there are artificial limits imposed by shyster company executives. The latter are illegal when your advertising states otherwise. |
|
Dezbend
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-20
| Let me take one more try at trying to explain my point of view:
First of all I think annex1982 was grievously misled, and I am in no way trying to defend RocketVoIP's case.
However, take the general case of a company that sells unlimited residential service in which the ToS state the service is not to be used for business functions.
That company should have the right to enforce the ToS.
One reasonable way to differentiate residential from business service might be to compare the amount and length of calls made by the average residential customer and those of an average business customer.
If the usage of a residential customer is looking like the statistical model of an average business customer, a reasonable conclusion would be that the service is being used for business purposes and therefore is in violation of the ToS.
The word unlimited is clearly a marketing ploy as we have recognized at least some natural limitations (even though in an earlier post I did mention you could actually have usage greater than the amount of minutes in a month). It is reasonable then to try to define what is meant by the word... I was merely trying to define the limits of "unlimited" in context. If consumers expect unlimited to mean equal to the amount of minutes in a month then so be it. We would have then found the true definition in context. I was making no suggestions as to what reasonable limits should be, only that they would have to exist.
btw, RadioDoc, your post was well said.
--
If it is not recorded, it simply does not exist. |
|
Dezbend
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-20
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc :Mine is advertised and sold as a range of bitrates, and I am happily sitting at the very top of that range (6016/608), and the company will let you drop to the next lower plan if they can't hit the minimum they advertise. That is still a volume you were sold not a speed; does your ISP guarantee latency? That would be a speed measurement. The point is the industry changed the definition of the word speed in this context and we all went along with it - even you. We have to recognize industry terms.
said by RadioDoc :Then the box manufacturer better not advertise it as having "unlimited capacity". Right you are, but what if I were a apple sales man with a box of apples saying "take unlimited apples for a low low price of..." There would be implied limits.
--
If it is not recorded, it simply does not exist. |
|
rec9140
Provoice just DO it
join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
|  reply to mph300
said by mph300 :
Uhhhh, try on a wife and 2 teen girls and 19 hours a month is a drop in the bucket! I KNOW the hourly usage on my pots line is at least 28 hours a WEEK!!
Ok, I give up. I see this posted on every one of these threads that comes along.
High VOIP use and then the "usual culprits rounded up" to include teens, wives, multiple teens etc..
Some one please explain to me who in the planet these people are talking to?!? ? 
To say I don't get it or understand all this yakking is to put it midly.
NO I do not have a wife/gf/so, or rugrats of any age or the need of either.
So some one enlighten me on what makes these teens and wives such gabbers.
I just don't get it 28 HOURS would last me eons. The next ice age would probably come along before I yak that much. I use those cans of compressed air to dust that thing in the corner off every now and then, oh yeah thats a phone.
Note: I 1000% support the term unlimited to mean NO LIMITS. So thats not my point. |
|
mph300
Two Thirds The Way There
join:2000-11-09
| said by rec9140:
To say I don't get it or understand all this yakking is to put it midly.
NO I do not have a wife/gf/so, or rugrats of any age or the need of either.
So some one enlighten me on what makes these teens and wives such gabbers.
Well, I don't REALLY think any man fully understands the female being!  |
|
mph300
Two Thirds The Way There
join:2000-11-09
| reply to Dezbend
said by Dezbend:
That company should have the right to enforce the ToS.
Agreed, but this discussion is not about whether or not company "X" can or cannot enforce their TOS. It is about a TOS that has conflicting terms in regards to what is advertised or conveyed to the consumer.
said by Dezbend:
I was merely trying to define the limits of "unlimited" in context. If consumers expect unlimited to mean equal to the amount of minutes in a month then so be it.
I do believe that consumers(you and I included) expects the unlimited amount of minutes within any given time period to be the actual number of minutes in the given period! |
|
phunkysmell
@comcast.net
| reply to Dezbend
There is an upper limit for VoIP in a month.
1440 minutes/day * 30 days = 43200 minutes
So in this case unlimited is not actually infinite.
I think when you have a family with teenagers and you're paying for a single residential VoIP line, you're going to use way more than 1000 minutes/month for NON-BUSINESS use. International? Maybe you have exchange students or distant family. Usually you pay extra 1-50 cents/minute for international calls anyway (I have Vonage and it does cost extra). |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| reply to lyls
said by lyls:
well that guy is always defending the companies for some obscure reason..... and i also agree that if they advertise unlimited then they better mean it and if they do say "switch to business or be disconnected" then they should have proof that the account in question is being used for business use
Good luck doing that without violating wiretap laws...
Even if I call nothing but businesses from my line, I could simply be an activist calling to complain at all those companies.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| reply to WhyADuck
said by WhyADuck :Agreed. This is consumer fraud and false advertising. I wish that consumer protection agencies and state attorney generals would prosecute the outfits that do this to the fullest extent of the law - they are acting like common criminals conning consumers, and they ought to be officially branded as such. Just my opinion. These guys do business in New York? Someone ought to tip Spitzer off to this: he could probably Martinize them quite effectively.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) |
|
JammerMan79
Premium,VIP
join:2004-05-13
Prince George, BC | reply to Thasp_without_post_w
I did 1500 minutes last month of just long distance. My gf and I moved 900KM (560 miles) away from all our family and friends. This total does not count local calls either.
1150 minutes in 1 month is nothing. |
|
