Cellphones Data transfer - No more "tethering" on Cingular MEdia Net

Author

No more "tethering" on Cingular MEdia Net

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:

... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
device tethering.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Wed, 28 Sep
2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:

>New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
> device tethering.

If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and if Cingular tries to
enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to terminate without penalty.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Scott

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <7cKdnd9vRstXtqbeRVn-hg@adelphia.com> on Wed, 28 Sep 2005 17:49:42 -0600,
"Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:dVF_e.89399$qY1.45657@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>Unless this was already language included in the Service Agreement.

Read what I wrote more carefully.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Wed, 28 Sep
2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:

>New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
> device tethering.

This new page is only reached by this small link on MEdia pages:
View our MEdia Legal Notices.
My personal (lay) opinion is that this doesn't constitute sufficient legal
notice (here in California at least).

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Scott

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:Y%F_e.89422$qY1.19573@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> Read what I wrote more carefully.
>
> --
No, John- read what I wrote more carefully. When that was posted to the
website has no value or legal value. The only way you get out of it is if
it is not in the Service Agreement. Period.

Now run along and brush up on those reading comprehension skills.

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <h8mdnR_6U-0crabeRVn-iQ@adelphia.com> on Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:09:49 -0600,
"Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:

>
>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:Y%F_e.89422$qY1.19573@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
[color=darkred]
>No, John- read what I wrote more carefully. When that was posted to the
>website has no value or legal value. The only way you get out of it is if
>it is not in the Service Agreement. Period.
>
>Now run along and brush up on those reading comprehension skills.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. The terms on the website are presumably
binding on those that purchase online, where there is no written Service
Agreement. Now run along and brush up on those reading comprehension skills.

p.s. There's a similar issue if you opt for online rather than paper billing.
Think about it. Just so you know, that's a thinking comprehension skills
matter. ;)

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Tony Clark

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
> device tethering.
>
SNIP

The question I have is why is Cingular making this so difficult for
everyone? Isn't being able to do voice and data one of the advantages of
GSM/GPRS phones? If phone companies would make the cost of data access
affordable (and faster) then more people would sign up for the service. It
seems to me that they really don't want to be in the "data" business which
is a real shame since you can get a cellular signal in lots of places you
can't get WiFi.

I might also add that I believe that it will be hard for Cingular to
determine whether you are tethering in most cases. I have seen some
(unscientific) experiments with tethering that indicate that they can only
tell based on URL and/or protocol used. If you use it for email, for
example, it will be very hard to tell if you're tethered or not.

They can, of course, remove me from the MediaNet package but that's
$20/month they won't get from me anymore. How stupid is that?

Cheers
TC

John Navas

2005-09-28, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <dZG_e.4847$oc.4360@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005
00:56:41 GMT, "Tony Clark" < curiousgeorge1964@ho
tmail.com> wrote:

>
>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>SNIP
>
>The question I have is why is Cingular making this so difficult for
>everyone?

It's only difficult if you go for the cheapest option. It easy on the full
price option.

>Isn't being able to do voice and data one of the advantages of
>GSM/GPRS phones?

To some. Many don't care.

>If phone companies would make the cost of data access
>affordable (and faster) then more people would sign up for the service.

Suppliers have to be concerned with making money, and thus have to balance
cost and price.

>It
>seems to me that they really don't want to be in the "data" business which
>is a real shame since you can get a cellular signal in lots of places you
>can't get WiFi.

Of course Cingular wants to be in the "data" (Data Connect) business, just at
a higher price point: <http://www.cingular.com/sbusiness/data_connect>

>I might also add that I believe that it will be hard for Cingular to
>determine whether you are tethering in most cases. I have seen some
>(unscientific) experiments with tethering that indicate that they can only
>tell based on URL and/or protocol used. If you use it for email, for
>example, it will be very hard to tell if you're tethered or not.

It might be based on total data volume, much like certain cable Internet
services.

>They can, of course, remove me from the MediaNet package but that's
>$20/month they won't get from me anymore. How stupid is that?

Not stupid at all if (a) your use was a loss and/or (b) you sign up for a more
expensive option.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Scott

2005-09-29, 2:48 am

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:tTG_e.334374$5N3.34694@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <h8mdnR_6U-0crabeRVn-iQ@adelphia.com> on Wed, 28 Sep 2005
18:09:49 - 0600,

> "Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>
if[color=darkred]
>
> We'll just have to agree to disagree. The terms on the website are
presumably
> binding on those that purchase online, where there is no written Service
> Agreement. Now run along and brush up on those reading comprehension
skills.

What you cited is not legally binding- it is nothing more than a description
of the product and limitations. The fact that this is or is not posted to
the site means nothing from a contract compliance standpoint. However, the
SERVICE AGREEMENT contained directly below it is much more legally binding.
This SERVICE AGREEMENT does come into play when purchasing online (it is
agreed to before the sale is completed) and represents a written Service
Agreement. Keep going- I'd have to work extremely hard to make you look as
ignorant as you are doing by yourself.

>
> p.s. There's a similar issue if you opt for online rather than paper
billing.
> Think about it. Just so you know, that's a thinking comprehension skills
> matter. ;)
>
>

Actually, that's nothing more than a very lame attempt to flame. Once again
you have essentially proven yourself to not have a clue and you can't cope
with it. Your opinion of me means very little- the fact that you have once
again shot your self in the foot for the world to see is the valuable thing
here.

RobR

2005-09-29, 2:48 am

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:dVF_e.89399$qY1.45657@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Wed, 28
> Sep
> 2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
> If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and if Cingular tries
> to
> enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to terminate without penalty.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Is data part of the contract? I didn't think there was any contract for any
data services, they're just add ons to the phone service aren't they? I
have the $10/month 5 meg plan which I can cancel any time I want
without penalty. The only contract I have is for my phone service.

John Navas

2005-09-29, 2:48 am

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In < ZNGdnbAS2M7yx6benZ2d
nUVZ_s-dnZ2d@adelphia.com> on Wed, 28 Sep 2005
21:08:43 -0600, "Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:

>What you cited is not legally binding- it is nothing more than a description
>of the product and limitations. The fact that this is or is not posted to
>the site means nothing from a contract compliance standpoint. However, the
>SERVICE AGREEMENT contained directly below it is much more legally binding.
>This SERVICE AGREEMENT does come into play when purchasing online (it is
>agreed to before the sale is completed) and represents a written Service
>Agreement. Keep going- I'd have to work extremely hard to make you look as
>ignorant as you are doing by yourself.

Cingular Wireless Terms of Service
<http://www.cingular.com/download/ C...f%20Service.pdf>

"If you lose your eligibility for a particular rate plan, we may change
your rate plan to one for which you qualify."

"This Agreement, the signature or rate summary sheet, the terms included in
the rate brochure(s) describing your plan and services, and any documents
expressly referred to herein or therein, make up the complete agreement
between you and Cingular..."

I think that's quite clear, and supports my original statement. I nonetheless
suspect you'll stay in denial, but that's your problem, not mine. In other
words, your childish ranting and name-calling notwithstanding, we'll just have
to agree to disagree.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-09-29, 2:48 am

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <V4J_e.16048$lP3.2126@trndny08> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:21:25 GMT, "RobR"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:dVF_e.89399$qY1.45657@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
[color=darkred]
>Is data part of the contract? I didn't think there was any contract for any
>data services, they're just add ons to the phone service aren't they? I
>have the $10/month 5 meg plan which I can cancel any time I want
>without penalty. The only contract I have is for my phone service.

See Miscellaneous in your contract (Terms of Service), which incorporates the
terms of whatever plans and services you have ordered.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Tony Clark

2005-09-29, 2:48 am

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:4hH_e.89610$qY1.79365@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
SNIP

SNIP

>
>
> To some. Many don't care.
>

True but it would seem that the cellular companies think there is a market
for "cellular" data otherwise why implement the infrastructure?

>
> Suppliers have to be concerned with making money, and thus have to balance
> cost and price.
>
Also true, however, they clearly think they can make money with the
"all-you-can-eat" plan for handsets. They seem to think the people won't use
the system much since most handsets are somewhat limited in their
capabilities. On the other hand there are smartphones, like the Treo and
that Nokia clam-shell device that approach the functionality of a general
purpose computer or laptop. As near as I can tell your contract with
Cingular isn't tied to the handset therefore you could get an unlocked
device which may be better suited for data access and still have untethered
and unlimited access. I see where Cingular tries to differentiate data on a
phone, a PDA and a PC but to me that's a fools game. Why should I have to
pay more for data based on the device I am viewing it on? Reading an email
on a phone, a PDA or a PC doesn't change the data in any way nor does
Cingular have to have different infrastructure to deliver it to me on
different devices.

>
> Of course Cingular wants to be in the "data" (Data Connect) business, just
> at
> a higher price point: <http://www.cingular.com/sbusiness/data_connect>
>
>
> It might be based on total data volume, much like certain cable Internet
> services.
>
>
> Not stupid at all if (a) your use was a loss and/or (b) you sign up for a
> more
> expensive option.
>
I think (a) might be hard to determine on a user by user basis. Sort of like
selling cut-rate tickets on airplane flights. Once you've sold enough
tickets to pay for the flight every thing else is profit. I would think that
Cingular's cost might decrease if they stopped trying to differentiate the
data based on the device used to access it and streamlined the data plans
into 2 or 3 options. I would also think that once you have the initial
network infrastructure in place the cost to add bandwidth would be a
fraction of the initial investment and therefore you would want to encourage
more people to use the system so you could amortize the cost across more
subscribers (hopefully at a lower price for everyone).

With respect to (b) paying for a more expensive Cingular plan is not an
option for me and I would more likely go for a different option like WiFi
which is not as convienent but in many cases less expensive and sometimes
free. If they lose too many subscribers to MediaNet then the costs will go
up for everyone. Not a good thing in my opinion.

Cheers
TC

Elmo P. Shagnasty

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

In article <5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:

> "If you lose your eligibility for a particular rate plan, we may change
> your rate plan to one for which you qualify."

Navas, maybe you can explain just what they think they mean there.

I would certainly love to see Cingular explain to the court what they
think they mean there.

RobR

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:vSJ_e.90012$qY1.62500@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <V4J_e.16048$lP3.2126@trndny08> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:21:25 GMT,
> "RobR"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> See Miscellaneous in your contract (Terms of Service), which incorporates
> the
> terms of whatever plans and services you have ordered.
>
> --

I'd like to, but I activated over the phone and the phone message just said
pressing 1 means you agree to the terms and conditions that can be
found.....
somewhere. URL maybe? I don't even remember. I suppose I should have
looks to see if I agreed to be someone's towel boy.

John Navas

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <elmop-106948. 06240229092005@nntp2
.usenetserver.com> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005
06:24:02 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
>Navas, maybe you can explain just what they think they mean there.
>
>I would certainly love to see Cingular explain to the court what they
>think they mean there.

For example, if you have a rate plan that depends on being employed by company
X, and then you leave that employment, you would no longer qualify for that
rate plan, and Cingular would have the right to move you to a rate plan for
which you then qualify.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <7LQ_e.31028$Fh4.11035@trndny03> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:04:19 GMT, "RobR"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:vSJ_e.90012$qY1.62500@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

[color=darkred]
>I'd like to, but I activated over the phone and the phone message just said
>pressing 1 means you agree to the terms and conditions that can be
>found.....
>somewhere. URL maybe? I don't even remember. I suppose I should have
>looks to see if I agreed to be someone's towel boy.

<http://www.cingular.com/download/ C...f%20Service.pdf>

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Steevo@my-deja.com

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:21:25 GMT, "RobR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>s data part of the contract? I didn't think there was any contract for any
>data services, they're just add ons to the phone service aren't they? I
>have the $10/month 5 meg plan which I can cancel any time I want
>without penalty. The only contract I have is for my phone service.

Practically speaking such contracts are trivial to break. I have
already documented everything I would need to bring up to break my 2
month old contract. Screen shots of the defects, etc. Documented
areas with bad service. They have nowhere to go.

If you wanted to tether and any carrier put any restrictions on them
after the fact just say no, tell them you will see them in court.

What are they going to do? Sue you over $150? I would sue them
however if they screwed with me and I would win, since they wouldn't
find it worth their while to show up.

I have already sued PBMS (Cingular) over cellular service. They
became very cooperative after I got them served. They couldn't settle
fast enough! I was laughing at them on the phone, they wouldn't deal
with the problems until I sued them.

John Navas

2005-09-29, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In < ou4oj1pnm6n5ppc7m9re
88c8f9cv934a2j@4ax.com> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:35:58
GMT, "Steevo@my-deja.com" <steevo@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 03:21:25 GMT, "RobR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>Practically speaking such contracts are trivial to break. I have
>already documented everything I would need to bring up to break my 2
>month old contract. Screen shots of the defects, etc.

What defects? And specifically how do they breach the service agreement?

>Documented
>areas with bad service.

Doesn't violate the service agreement -- read the coverage disclaimer that you
agreed to.

>They have nowhere to go.

I'm unconvinced. ;)

>If you wanted to tether and any carrier put any restrictions on them
>after the fact just say no, tell them you will see them in court.

If you were notified of a change in terms, and you continued to use the
feature, then you agreed to those terms. Your recourse in the case of a
significant change in service is to terminate.

>What are they going to do? Sue you over $150?

Ding your credit.

>I would sue them
>however if they screwed with me and I would win, since they wouldn't
>find it worth their while to show up.

You have way more free time than I do.

>I have already sued PBMS (Cingular) over cellular service. They
>became very cooperative after I got them served. They couldn't settle
>fast enough! I was laughing at them on the phone, they wouldn't deal
>with the problems until I sued them.

PBMS then isn't Cingular now, which I think you'd find considerably tougher.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

RobR

2005-09-29, 11:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:uAU_e.91671$qY1.4314@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <7LQ_e.31028$Fh4.11035@trndny03> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:04:19 GMT,
> "RobR"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.cingular.com/download/ C...f%20Service.pdf>
>

well, thats not necessarily the agreement that was there when i 'signed'

John Navas

2005-09-29, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <j_Y_e.20401$w74.10143@trndny05> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:26:39 GMT, "RobR"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:uAU_e.91671$qY1.4314@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

>
>well, thats not necessarily the agreement that was there when i 'signed'

True, but then that's your responsibility, not mine.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Cliff

2005-09-29, 11:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:dVF_e.89399$qY1.45657@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <aTF_e.89393$qY1.61014@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Wed, 28
Sep
> 2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
> If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and if Cingular tries
to
> enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to terminate without penalty.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

I am certainly NOT an lawyer, but I believe that in the Cingular T&C's it
states that Cingular is selling a wireless connection and that with "Proper
Notice" any rate plan and prices are subject to change. Anyone have a
contract handy?

Scott

2005-09-30, 2:48 am

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In < ZNGdnbAS2M7yx6benZ2d
nUVZ_s-dnZ2d@adelphia.com> on Wed, 28 Sep 2005
> 21:08:43 -0600, "Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
description[color=da
rkred]
to[color=darkred]
the[color=darkred]
binding.[color=darkred]
as[color=darkred]
>
> Cingular Wireless Terms of Service
> <http://www.cingular.com/download/ C...f%20Service.pdf>
>
> "If you lose your eligibility for a particular rate plan, we may change
> your rate plan to one for which you qualify."
>
> "This Agreement, the signature or rate summary sheet, the terms
included in
> the rate brochure(s) describing your plan and services, and any
documents
> expressly referred to herein or therein, make up the complete agreement
> between you and Cingular..."
>
> I think that's quite clear, and supports my original statement. I
nonetheless
> suspect you'll stay in denial, but that's your problem, not mine. In
other

> words, your childish ranting and name-calling notwithstanding, we'll just
have
> to agree to disagree.
>
> --

Your original statement went exctly like this:

">New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
> device tethering.

>If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and if Cingular tries
to
>enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to terminate without penalty."

The "new policy" you reference with a direct quote is not an actionable
item......period. Whether or not the information you quoted is or is not
posted to the website has no bearing on the validity of a service contract.
The fact that you are now quoting from a service agreement after being
called on it is rather funny. What is even more hilarious is that your
original statement, "If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and
if Cingular tries to enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to
terminate without penalty" is not supported by what you just quoted.

I am obviously not the one in denial here.

RobR

2005-09-30, 5:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:lY__e.340512$5N3.33987@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <j_Y_e.20401$w74.10143@trndny05> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:26:39 GMT,
> "RobR"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> True, but then that's your responsibility, not mine.
>

I'm well aware of that Dad.

John Navas

2005-09-30, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <P90%e.415$zw5.153@tornado.texas.rr.com> on Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:03:43 GMT,
"Cliff" < missingrealname@yaho
o.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:dVF_e.89399$qY1.45657@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
[color=darkred]
>I am certainly NOT an lawyer, but I believe that in the Cingular T&C's it
>states that Cingular is selling a wireless connection and that with "Proper
>Notice" any rate plan and prices are subject to change. Anyone have a
>contract handy?

<http://www.cingular.com/download/ C...f%20Service.pdf>:

CHANGES TO TERMS AND RATES
We may change any terms, conditions, rates, fees, expenses, or
charges regarding your service at any time. We will provide you with
notice of such changes (other than changes to governmental fees,
proportional charges for governmental mandates, roamer rates or
administrative charges) either in your monthly bill or separately.
You understand and agree that State and Federal Universal Service
Fees and other governmentally imposed fees, whether or not assessed
directly upon you, may be increased based upon the government’s or
our calculations. IF WE INCREASE THE PRICE OF ANY OF THE SERVICES TO
WHICH YOU SUBSCRIBE, AS SUCH PRICES ARE SET FORTH IN YOUR RATE PLAN
BROCHURE, OR IF WE MATERIALLY DECREASE THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA IN WHICH
YOUR AIRTIME RATE APPLIES (OTHER THAN A TEMPORARY DECREASE FOR
REPAIRS OR MAINTENANCE), WE WILL DISCLOSE THE CHANGE AT LEAST ONE
BILLING CYCLE IN ADVANCE (EITHER THROUGH A NOTICE WITH YOUR BILL, A
TEXT MESSAGE TO YOUR EQUIPMENT, OR OTHERWISE) AND YOU MAY TERMINATE
THIS AGREEMENT WITHOUT PAYING AN EARLY TERMINATION FEE OR RETURNING
OR PAYING FOR ANY PROMOTIONAL ITEMS, PROVIDED YOUR NOTICE OF
TERMINATION IS DELIVERED TO US WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER THE
FIRST BILL REFLECTING THE CHANGE. If you lose your eligibility for a
particular rate plan, we may change your rate plan to one for which
you qualify.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Tim

2005-09-30, 11:48 pm

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas
< spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:

>New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:

> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular

"as determined by Cingular"?

That's very one-sided.

John Navas

2005-09-30, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <fvadnfjq0qp0LKHeRVn-iA@adelphia.com> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:34:04 -0600,
"Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

[color=darkred]
>Your original statement went exctly like this:
>
>">New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
>
>The "new policy" you reference with a direct quote is not an actionable
>item......period.

I think it is, as per the quotation above, so again, we'll just have to agree
to disagree.

>Whether or not the information you quoted is or is not
>posted to the website

You didn't bother to check?

>has no bearing on the validity of a service contract.

True. It's part of the service agreement.

>The fact that you are now quoting from a service agreement after being
>called on it is rather funny. What is even more hilarious is that your
>original statement, "If you signed up before this new policy was posted, and
>if Cingular tries to enforce it, I believe you would be entitled to
>terminate without penalty" is not supported by what you just quoted.

You have a strange sense of humor.

>I am obviously not the one in denial here.

You have a strange sense of reality as well.

Regardless, suit yourself -- what you think is no concern of mine.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-09-30, 11:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In < 5f9rj11bmqa2o9jte21d
o7i5shl20ta6sd@4ax.com> on Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:55:17
-0700, Tim <bodysurf@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas
>< spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>"as determined by Cingular"?
>
>That's very one-sided.

It's Cingular's business, so why should it not be one-sided?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Scott en Aztlán

2005-10-01, 2:48 am

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:41:58 GMT, John Navas
< spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:

>New webpage <http://www.cingular.com/media/media_legal>:
>
> ... MEdia Net packages are not intended for tethering. Cingular
> reserves the right to remove customers from MEdia Net packages for
> the use of a wireless device as an interface to other devices or
> networks, as determined by Cingular, including but not limited to
> device tethering.

I just dropped the Media Net packages from both of my phones.

Your loss, Cingular. Data is data, and somehow T-Mobile manages to
provide unlimited data for $20/month and still make a profit. What a
pity you're too rapacious to do the same. Your greed has cost you
$40/month from me.

Scott

2005-10-01, 5:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:vXh%e.345958$5N3.208313@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <fvadnfjq0qp0LKHeRVn-iA@adelphia.com> on Thu, 29 Sep 2005
> 21:34:04 -0600,
> "Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
>
> I think it is, as per the quotation above, so again, we'll just have to
> agree
> to disagree.

It is not a legal document- how can it be actionable?

>
>
> You didn't bother to check?

I did bother to check- your need to post out of context is expected.

>
>
> True. It's part of the service agreement.

Thank you for agreeing that you were in error.

>
>
> You have a strange sense of humor.

Yes I do.

>
>
> You have a strange sense of reality as well.

No - I leave that to you.

John Navas

2005-10-01, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <IPmdnUKFEogwOqPeRVn-ug@adelphia.com> on Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:13:49 -0600,
"Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:

>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
>news:vXh%e.345958$5N3.208313@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>It is not a legal document- how can it be actionable?

Asked and answered:
<news:5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>

>
>I did bother to check- ...

Why am I not surprised. It's a big part of why I don't waste much time on
responses to your argumentative posts.

>
>Thank you for agreeing that you were in error.

Only in your mind.

>
>Yes I do.

At least we agree on something.

>
>No - I leave that to you.

Obviously not.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

2005-10-01, 11:48 pm

Could you children please run along and play somewhere else? Maybe in a
playground somewhere?

This is an international news group for specific telecom issues.

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:H_x%e.350369$5N3.312192@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <IPmdnUKFEogwOqPeRVn-ug@adelphia.com> on Sat, 1 Oct 2005
09:13:49 - 0600,

> "Scott" <how.do@you.do> wrote:
>
tries[color=darkred]

>
> Asked and answered:
> <news:5PJ_e.90004$qY1.31253@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
>
>
> Why am I not surprised. It's a big part of why I don't waste much time on
> responses to your argumentative posts.
>
>
> Only in your mind.
>
posted,[color=darkre
d]
>
> At least we agree on something.
>
>
> Obviously not.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas

2005-10-01, 11:48 pm

It's actually a Cingular-specific national newsgroup. I know, because I wrote
the charter. ;)

In <ExD%e.147472$dP1.504851@newsc.telia.net> on Sat, 01 Oct 2005 21:51:32 GMT,
"BG" <borje@gmx.net> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>Could you children please run along and play somewhere else? Maybe in a
>playground somewhere?
>
>This is an international news group for specific telecom issues.
>
>
>"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> skrev i meddelandet
>news:H_x%e.350369$5N3.312192@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>09:13:49 -0600,
>tries
>posted,

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Frau Himmel

2005-10-01, 11:48 pm

BG answered:
> Could you children please run along and play somewhere else? Maybe in a
> playground somewhere?
>
> This is an international news group for specific telecom issues.
>
why don't you go outside and play hide and go XXXX yourself.
--
Frau Himmel
Still trying to outrun the death grip clutches of The Strangler

2005-10-02, 5:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:QIE%e.99225$qY1.59136@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> It's actually a Cingular-specific national newsgroup. I know, because I
wrote

> the charter. ;)

Do you always miss the point in a posting? My posting was about your never
ending blabbering!

I have read TOO MANY of your postings to bother about continueing this
"discussion" with you.

maybe that group is cingular specific, but your obviously cross posting to
alt.cellular.data

2005-10-02, 5:48 pm

"Frau Himmel" <Frau_Himmel@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:UUE%e.1948$4h2.1011@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> BG answered:
> why don't you go outside and play hide and go XXXX yourself.

Thanks for further demonstrating what I meant!

Cliff

2005-10-08, 5:48 pm

"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:4hH_e.89610$qY1.79365@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <dZG_e.4847$oc.4360@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> on Thu, 29 Sep
2005
> 00:56:41 GMT, "Tony Clark" < curiousgeorge1964@ho
tmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's only difficult if you go for the cheapest option. It easy on the
full
> price option.
>
>
> To some. Many don't care.
>
>
> Suppliers have to be concerned with making money, and thus have to balance
> cost and price.
>
which[color=darkred]

>
> Of course Cingular wants to be in the "data" (Data Connect) business, just
at
> a higher price point: <http://www.cingular.com/sbusiness/data_connect>
>
only[color=darkred]
>
> It might be based on total data volume, much like certain cable Internet
> services.
>
>
> Not stupid at all if (a) your use was a loss and/or (b) you sign up for a
more
> expensive option.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

And I think that as soon as the edge technology is nationwide and then they
introduce the next generation of data speeds and a cellular device could
REALLY be an option for high speed internet then I think you will see the
prices on data connect start to fall as Cingular moves into the ISP provider
arena. And you gotta see it coming.

John Navas

2005-10-08, 5:48 pm

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <9zR1f.19950$Q53.17214@tornado.texas.rr.com> on Sat, 08 Oct 2005 15:27:01
GMT, "Cliff" < missingrealname@yaho
o.com> wrote:

>And I think that as soon as the edge technology is nationwide and then they

My understanding is that EGPRS(EDGE) is now essentially fully deployed.

>introduce the next generation of data speeds and a cellular device could

HSDPA, due to be rolled out in a number of markets by the end of this year,
and fully deployed next year.

>REALLY be an option for high speed internet then I think you will see the
>prices on data connect start to fall as Cingular moves into the ISP provider
>arena. And you gotta see it coming.

Perhaps, but cellular bandwidth is limited, so I personally don't think that
data prices will fall much below current levels.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

DJRobX

2005-10-09, 5:48 am

> Perhaps, but cellular bandwidth is limited, so I personally don't think that
> data prices will fall much below current levels.

How limited can it be when they offer an unlimited plan and MobiTV?
Verizon is pushing V-Cast and if it becomes even mildly popular,
Cingular will have to beef up their network to compete. Why would
streaming video and audio directly to a phone be OK, but some basic web
surfing from a laptop not be OK? Greed! They just want to be able to
keep charging the "special needs" groups more. $20 seems like a fair
price for cellular dialup-like service. More than that? No way.
$14.95 DSL seemed absolutely absurd just a few years ago, but it's here
now (and offered by Cingular's parent SBC, no less.)

These new "terms" are interesting. I'm just not sure if this is
another example of harsh TOS verbage that's only going to be exercised
in certain abuse circumstances (like the "no-servers" policy in most
AUPs that is virtually always ignored). Are they really going to deny
themselves $20/month from paying customers that suck up 30mb per month
on a laptop, pissing them off, potentially losing them entirely to
another carrier? Or are they just shielding themselves from true
abuse? Or maybe they'll create a "walled garden" for MEdia Net
logins. Just seems like that would be going backwards in a time when
Verizon is going to be kicking them in the pants with their better
mobile broadband network (that might actually be WORTH more than $19 a
month).

LinkBot