3 ms·

Consumers never look at that side of the equation. They don't read their contracts, they don't do their due diligence. They just blame the company and claim the

Consumers never look at that side of the equation. They don't read their contracts, they don't do their due diligence. They just blame the company and claim the role of victim when something doesn't work out in their favour or when the company does things like ask people to not abuse the network.

LunaSea 11y ago
Then again the idea of having alternatives (for anything) is fantasy in the current state of the world.
LunaSea 11y ago
Then again the idea of having alternatives (for anything) is fantasy in the current state of the world.
teacup50 11y ago
The party with more resources has the advantage -- information and power asymmetry falls in their favor. Of course consumers don't "do their due diligence", because they'd have to do so 1000s of times a day. This is a large part of why we have consumer protection laws in the first place.
- brandon272 11y ago
  I don't sign 2 year cell phone contracts "1000's of times a day" and when I do sign them I read them because they're really not that long. And if I don't read them and something doesn't work out in my favour I don't pretend it's the phone company's fault. Consumer protection laws do not remove all responsibility from the consumer to be aware of what they are getting into.
  - teacup50 11y ago
    What percentage of consumers do you think are capable of reading contract language accurately, assessing risk/value, judging things like how much bandwidth they use, doing what, and how that may increase or decrease? Likewise, how many lawyers working for cell phone companies are capable of reading contract language accurately? How capable do you think cell phone companies are at projecting data utilization based on the huge trove of customer data they have available to them? Requiring honesty around simple terms like "unlimited" helps level that playing field, at least in some small way.
dingaling 11y ago
It's not really a contract, as there is no mutual meeting of minds and no opportunity for negotiation on part of the weaker party. It is technically a contract of adhesion. And when the market only offers a 'choice' of providers all mandating the same terms... where's the choice?
- chc 11y ago
  Judges will sometimes look skeptically on contracts of adhesion because of the power imbalance, but in this case, this term is not particularly unreasonable or surprising. If you want Internet for an unlimited number of devices and an unlimited number of users, everybody is going to want you to pay more because that will be more of a burden on the provider on average than just offering data for one mobile phone. I don't know what judge would look at that and say, "Wow, nobody would have ever agreed to this contract if they'd realized that was in there."

LunaSea 11y ago

Then again the idea of having alternatives (for anything) is fantasy in the current state of the world.

LunaSea 11y ago

Then again the idea of having alternatives (for anything) is fantasy in the current state of the world.

teacup50 11y ago

The party with more resources has the advantage -- information and power asymmetry falls in their favor. Of course consumers don't "do their due diligence", because they'd have to do so 1000s of times a day. This is a large part of why we have consumer protection laws in the first place.

brandon272 11y ago
I don't sign 2 year cell phone contracts "1000's of times a day" and when I do sign them I read them because they're really not that long. And if I don't read them and something doesn't work out in my favour I don't pretend it's the phone company's fault. Consumer protection laws do not remove all responsibility from the consumer to be aware of what they are getting into.
- teacup50 11y ago
  What percentage of consumers do you think are capable of reading contract language accurately, assessing risk/value, judging things like how much bandwidth they use, doing what, and how that may increase or decrease? Likewise, how many lawyers working for cell phone companies are capable of reading contract language accurately? How capable do you think cell phone companies are at projecting data utilization based on the huge trove of customer data they have available to them? Requiring honesty around simple terms like "unlimited" helps level that playing field, at least in some small way.

dingaling 11y ago

It's not really a contract, as there is no mutual meeting of minds and no opportunity for negotiation on part of the weaker party. It is technically a contract of adhesion. And when the market only offers a 'choice' of providers all mandating the same terms... where's the choice?

chc 11y ago
Judges will sometimes look skeptically on contracts of adhesion because of the power imbalance, but in this case, this term is not particularly unreasonable or surprising. If you want Internet for an unlimited number of devices and an unlimited number of users, everybody is going to want you to pay more because that will be more of a burden on the provider on average than just offering data for one mobile phone. I don't know what judge would look at that and say, "Wow, nobody would have ever agreed to this contract if they'd realized that was in there."