Then WHY NOT STATE THAT SEMI-FIXED LIMIT TO BEGIN WITH AND SAVE EVERYONE THE HASSLE OF TRYING TO GUESS WHETHER THEIR USAGE WILL BE ALLOWED OR NOT? If the limit

Then WHY NOT STATE THAT SEMI-FIXED LIMIT TO BEGIN WITH AND SAVE EVERYONE THE HASSLE OF TRYING TO GUESS WHETHER THEIR USAGE WILL BE ALLOWED OR NOT? If the limit is dynamic and periodically re-evaluated, then you run into the "there's always an outlier" problem. If the determination isn't dynamic, and Snake Inc. advertises its service as 'unlimited' instead of stating the limit, and then starts discriminating against users or tools associated with higher usage, and get a reputation of being a snake in addition to actually having an undisclosed cap, what then? They'll not only lose their high-end customers to other services (which apparently they don't want or they could have disclosed the limits to begin with), but as already mentioned they also hurt their reputation, because whatever the courts say, people are not happy when an unlimited service actually discriminates against high-usage customers.