3 ms·
If I had a contract with a company that charged $193K to replace said $80 artwork - should I then be able to claim $193K damages?
by thailandstartup 15y ago
If I had a contract with a company that charged $193K to replace said $80 artwork - should I then be able to claim $193K damages?
- tptacek 15y agoNo, because that scenario isn't any different from the original scenario proposed. The utility is in this case contractually obligated to pay those fees. The basis for damages here is straightforward.
- hugh3 15y agoBesides, "eighty bucks" is a silly estimate anyway. Nobody in Australia will sell you unlimited 3G data for twenty bucks a month. If you think that's unfair compared to other countries, remember that Australia has a population density of two people per square kilometre, and that Telstra actually has a pretty darn good coverage in their 3G network (Optus and Vodafone are cheaper but can't be expected to work reliably outside major cities). Somebody mentioned $22 a gig... well, the highest-data plan on http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/browsing_packs.html http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/browsing_packs.html is $69 for twelve gigs a month, with excess data charged at five cents a meg, or fifty dollars a gig. That sounds like a lot, but as we've said, the 3G network really isn't designed for individual customers doing terabytes of data per day... they clearly don't want you using 3G in that way.
- wglb 15y agoBut isn't it likely that the meter owner might strike a deal for thousands of devices which each send a very minor bit of data once or four times a month, and be able to structure that contract a little differently?
- hugh3 15y agoMost certainly. I'm just pointing out that $200,000 is, in fact, consistent with the prevailing market rates if you choose to download terabytes worth of data on your 3G modem.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]