New AT&T terms of service: We'll cut off your Internet connect

[Glowstick]

I suppose AT&T will get scots-free from this, due to them voluntarily aiding the NSA. In Europe, they'd be up **** creek for even thinking about this.

[alltel_lover_sorta]

AT&T must suck........... glad im not with them

[Shof]

I wish i can dump ATT, and i wannted to it for many years but i cant

[L3thal Veteran]

Good ol' ATT :laugh:

[x-scratch]

well im thru bellsouth the new att grrr ohh well they better fix the download & upload speeds ohh wait i better not complain

[revvo]

Sigh. You don't have constitutional rights against private companies. They apply to the government. A private company doesn't have to follow them.

Oh really? Please elaborate because I doubt private companies have the right to silence customers in some cases where speaking against the company would normaly be the right thing to do.

That's exactly what I was going to post. If you don't like the company and their practices, don't use them. Whatever you do, don't continue to use their services and whine about it. You'll be just as bad as them in that case.

We're not saying they're not allowed to have such a clause in the TOS. We're just saying it's dirty.

A lot of people don't read the TOS so many will be surprised if their service is cut off or will be cut off. I know I know, this i sthe customer's fault for not reading, well, it's the same thing with softwares installing spyware/adware. They mention it in the license but many don't reads it and click [NEXT] [NEXT] [NEXT] until the spyware's installed. Do you enjoy that? You should, you agreed to it!

[[bear]]

Well you know how the rest goes... ;)

[Beyond Normal]

Oh really? Please elaborate because I doubt private companies have the right to silence customers in some cases where speaking against the company would normaly be the right thing to do.

We're not saying they're not allowed to have such a clause in the TOS. We're just saying it's dirty.

A lot of people don't read the TOS so many will be surprised if their service is cut off or will be cut off. I know I know, this i sthe customer's fault for not reading, well, it's the same thing with softwares installing spyware/adware. They mention it in the license but many don't reads it and click [NEXT] [NEXT] [NEXT] until the spyware's installed. Do you enjoy that? You should, you agreed to it!

Look up the definitions of 'Libel' and 'Slander'. They may fall into what you're thinking about but won't help your argument, particularly if what people are complaining about is listed in the contract they have to agree to....

Also, 'Constitutional Rights' are reserved for grievances / redress by 'legal citizens' against the 'government'. Technically, they have little weight in 'private', corporate affairs unless laws have been enacted for that purpose.. and should have no weight at all when dealing with 'illegal citizens'.

[revvo]

Look up the definitions of 'Libel' and 'Slander'. They may fall into what you're thinking about but won't help your argument, particularly if what people are complaining about is listed in the contract they have to agree to....

Yes welcome to Neowin to you too :rofl:

I guess you ignored the rest of my post which pointed their way of making people agree to that clause which is the TOS that most ppl do not read, just like what you did.

[Beyond Normal]

Yes welcome to Neowin to you too :rofl:

I guess you ignored the rest of my post which pointed their way of making people agree to that clause which is the TOS that most ppl do not read, just like what you did.

Umm... yeah, thanks for the warm welcome.

OTOH....

I didn't have to read the TOS. People have already spread it about quite nicely.

Given that, would I have the choice of accepting the service (were it to be one of my options) but it's not. Given that fact as well, if I had the option and I would accept their service agreement after reading the blather, what right have I to talk negatively about their service once I've agreed to what they say... that I won't speak so?

This is akin to an employee or employer not being allowed to say anything perjorative or in the negative about either for fear of retribution for saying slanderous our libelous things. Oh wait. employers cannot say anything detrimental about employees.

Edited October 1, 2007 by Beyond Normal

[thollian]

Well you know how the rest goes... ;)

haha, thats awesome!

[dnast]

Hmm...the link to the TOS in the original post just takes you to a "Posting New Topic" form in Neowin....

15megs!! Thats awesome. I pay about $65 for mine (6Mbps) from AT&T. They either dont care i download or they havent caught on yet.

Wow. Where are you located? I pay around $35 for 6 Mbps from them. If AT&T cost that much for me I would've stuck with Comcast (and got a faster, more reliable service for a lower price).

Umm... yeah, thanks for the warm welcome.

OTOH....

I didn't have to read the TOS. People have already spread it about quite nicely.

Given that, would I have the choice of accepting the service (were it to be one of my options) but it's not. Given that fact as well, if I had the option and I would accept their service agreement after reading the blather, what right have I to talk negatively about their service once I've agreed to what they say... that I won't speak so?

This is akin to an employee or employer not being allowed to say anything perjorative or in the negative about either for fear of retribution for saying slanderous our libelous things. Oh wait. employers cannot say anything detrimental about employees.

I've been an AT&T customer for a couple of years and did not agree to this. I'm sure there was something in the TOS back when I signed up that said that the TOS could change and I couldn't do anything about it, but most of them say that these days. If companies are allowed to say that their TOS can change to however they please, then there should be some checks to ensure that nothing ridiculous is added like preventing customers from being able to mention anything bad about said company's services.

If people are making up things about the company, then yes, I can understand why the company wouldn't continue providing services. But if my Internet gets cut off because I mention on a message board that my service was interrupted at least 4 times in the past 30 days (which is true), that shouldn't give AT&T the right to cut me off permanently.

[webeagle12]

ATT sucks, oups my lags are sssshaking :whistle:

[excalpius]

Serve them right if ALL of their customers left them.

We did. It's why AT&T went out of business...

Until they were bought by Cingular...

Which renamed itself AT&T...

And seems to have inherited the scumbag virus.

So, leave them again. They'll figure it out eventually.

[Toology]

Sigh. You don't have constitutional rights against private companies. They apply to the government. A private company doesn't have to follow them.

Yes, you do. Civil liberties protect you against actions by the government(s) and civil rights against that of individuals. Precedent-setting court cases have established companies to fall under the definition of an individual. The liberties/rights you're entitled to are outlined in the Constitution but have obviously been expanded upon, i.e: a company cannot discriminate in hiring, discriminate in the selling of homes (which DID happen prior to the Fair Housing Act), etc.

Where do you get this bull crap that private companies are exempt from the most basic and supreme law of the land?

[Mike Frett]

Yes, you do. Civil liberties protect you against actions by the government(s) and civil rights against that of individuals. Precedent-setting court cases have established companies to fall under the definition of an individual. The liberties/rights you're entitled to are outlined in the Constitution but have obviously been expanded upon, i.e: a company cannot discriminate in hiring, discriminate in the selling of homes (which DID happen prior to the Fair Housing Act), etc.

Toology's right. Your rights have been expanded to include private company's. They are not exempt.

[ZonoBurk]

I hate it that AT&T bought Bellsouth UHH! They also bought Cingular back. Cingular and it's prices SUCKED big time where I live. Bellsouth err AT&T DSL is the only DSL around here, even though I can't get it, but it's 10 miles down the road! Better than $50 HughesNet!

[Farstrider]

Well you know how the rest goes... ;)

Be careful, the owners [sic] (Read Neobond as one of them...) of this site (NeoWin.net) might just receive an e-mail from AT&T telling them to cease and desist from this slanderous material being posted on the forums ..................... :whistle:

[Minifig]

I wrote my congress person about this, I'm waiting for a reply.

And people ask me why I don't want to use AT&T Cable as my broadband anymore.

[Lexcyn]

AT&T disconnecting critical users? Probably not

You may have heard the hubbub in the last 24 hours about AT&T's new Terms of Service for its DSL accounts, and its apparent hardline approach to customers who may criticize the company. For those of you not up to speed, the long and short of it is that the TOS stipulates that AT&T can and does reserve the right to disconnect any user's account if the telco believes said user is utilizing the connection to "damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries." Sounds doomy and gloomy, doesn't it? Well, AT&T issued a statement in response to the backlash it's been getting, making it explicitly clear that it is not the company's policy to axe users who take it to task. Here's what they had to say:

"AT& T respects its subscribers' rights to voice their opinions and concerns over any matter they wish. However, we retain the right to disassociate ourselves from websites and messages explicitly advocating violence, or any message that poses a threat to children (e.g. child pornography or exploitation). We do not terminate customer service solely because a customer speaks negatively about AT&T. This policy is not new and it's not unique to AT&T."

So, according to The Man, you can talk all the smack you want about AT&T and its screwball policies / high prices / use of dental implants to monitor your conversations -- without the fear of having the lines snipped... or so they say.

Source: Engadget