3 ms·

The guy compares his class of service with Amazon. Is this a joke? "Amazon, Microsoft, hosting companies like OVH and Digital Ocean, and universities like MIT

The guy compares his class of service with Amazon. Is this a joke? "Amazon, Microsoft, hosting companies like OVH and Digital Ocean, and universities like MIT" The combined spend of that group is multiples of what he is spending on his residential service.

kadoban 5y ago
Which rules only apply to the little guy?
- wmf 5y ago
  The consumer AUP.
- PeterisP 5y ago
  It's perfectly legitimate for a company to apply more lenient conditions - or simply not enforce certain requirements - for some customers, especially bigger and more profitable ones. There is no duty to treat your customers equally (with specific narrow exceptions for discrimination of explicitly named protected groups for some types of contracts), you are free to enforce an AUP only for "the little guy" if you feel that's more profitable for you. You are also free to simply deny service to someone just because; and as a more lenient way, you are free to warn someone that you will deny service if they will continue a certain activity, no matter if it was specified in some rules before or not. You likely would have to refund any prepayments and connection fees, however, there is no duty for you to continue dealing with an unwanted customer just because they are keeping within the letter of the rules you posted - doing business with someone or refusing to do so is a free choice. You could make a good argument that ISPs should be treated like regulated utilities who would have to service everyone, and service everyone equally, because of the importance of internet access in modern society - however, this is not the situation right now in USA.
  - kadoban 5y ago
    > You could make a good argument that ISPs should be treated like regulated utilities who would have to service everyone, and service everyone equally, because of the importance of internet access in modern society - however, this is not the situation right now in USA. Yeah, it absolutely should be.

kadoban 5y ago

Which rules only apply to the little guy?

wmf 5y ago
The consumer AUP.
PeterisP 5y ago
It's perfectly legitimate for a company to apply more lenient conditions - or simply not enforce certain requirements - for some customers, especially bigger and more profitable ones. There is no duty to treat your customers equally (with specific narrow exceptions for discrimination of explicitly named protected groups for some types of contracts), you are free to enforce an AUP only for "the little guy" if you feel that's more profitable for you. You are also free to simply deny service to someone just because; and as a more lenient way, you are free to warn someone that you will deny service if they will continue a certain activity, no matter if it was specified in some rules before or not. You likely would have to refund any prepayments and connection fees, however, there is no duty for you to continue dealing with an unwanted customer just because they are keeping within the letter of the rules you posted - doing business with someone or refusing to do so is a free choice. You could make a good argument that ISPs should be treated like regulated utilities who would have to service everyone, and service everyone equally, because of the importance of internet access in modern society - however, this is not the situation right now in USA.
- kadoban 5y ago
  > You could make a good argument that ISPs should be treated like regulated utilities who would have to service everyone, and service everyone equally, because of the importance of internet access in modern society - however, this is not the situation right now in USA. Yeah, it absolutely should be.