38 ms·
> such a literal interpretation attempts to create and exploit a loophole for one's own benefit at extreme cost to the provider, by refusing a common sense inte
by istinetz 4y ago
> such a literal interpretation attempts to create and exploit a loophole for one's own benefit at extreme cost to the provider, by refusing a common sense interpretation of 'Unlimited within reason'.
It's not a "loophole" to use 80% of the capacity that was advertised and sold to you. If they want to sell "unlimited within reason" capacity, they should advertise "unlimited within reason", instead of "unlimited".
I really don't understand your viewpoint.
- altairprime 4y agoIn the UK, my viewpoint is prohibited: companies may not terminate service based on excessive usage on an “unlimited” plan. They may, however, throttle service. In the US, it’s unclear if my viewpoint is prohibited, and good luck to anyone filing a lawsuit. I would expect my viewpoint to likely survive a US court case. Hetzner is based in Germany; I am not familiar with whether DE or EU laws prohibit them from terminating service at will when they feel that “unlimited” service is being abused. If you do research into that, let us know what you find.