View Single Post
  #519 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2010, 07:35 PM
blackangst's Avatar
blackangst
PPCGeeks Regular
Offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 236
Reputation: 205
blackangst is keeping up the good workblackangst is keeping up the good workblackangst is keeping up the good work
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Re: New SERO Oct 1st

Quote:
Originally Posted by nerys View Post
well when did the terms say I COULD NOT use any phone mr. sprint since 2000. I say there was no such rule UNTIL the instinct.

My contention is that sprint should NOT be permitted to make such rules. This is not sprints sand box contrary to what people thing. We have laws and we decide what those rules are.
It IS Sprint's sandbox if you choose to accept Sprint's T&C's. Which you did when you activated service. "We" as you so aptly put it do not decide on a whim what a corporations T&C's are. If they are found to be illegal, they are adjusted and punished. The issue with the Instict was settled in the courts years ago. Whine and b1tch all you want, the law is not on your side.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nerys View Post
IE sprints rules need to reasonable. My contention is that this is NOT reasonable.
No, they dont. EVERY carrier has device restrictions, and never has it been found to be illegal. COMPANIES, not the general public, make the rules. If you dont like them, tough. Go somewhere else. Is it also "illegal" for carriers to require a data plan for some devices? No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nerys View Post
normally market forces will enforce reasonable limits on a company. but market forces DO NOT APPLY normally in this context because they are using OUR AIRWAVES and we have unwillingly (thanks FCC) granted them an effective oligarchy via selling bandwidth and the intrinsic limits of that bandwidth (frequency bands)

thats all.
Wrong. "Market forces" do not enforce ANYTHING in regards to T&C's. They could influence, but the never enforce. Please cite an example if you disagree.

By the way, I know you know this, and it has been pointed out to you before, but you need to re-read it:

Quote:
Our Policies
Services are subject to our business policies, practices and procedures ("Policies"). You agree to adhere to all of our Policies when you use our Services. Our Policies are subject to change at anytime with or without notice.

When You Accept The Agreement
You must have the legal capacity to accept the Agreement. You accept the Agreement when you do any of the following: (a) accept the Agreement through any printed, oral or electronic statement; (b) attempt to or in any way use the Services; (c) pay for the Services; or (d) open any package or start any program that says you are accepting the Agreement when doing so. If you don't want to accept the Agreement, don't do any of these things.

Our Right To Change The Agreement & Your Related Rights
We may change any part of the Agreement at any time, including, but not limited to, rates, charges, how we calculate charges, or your terms of Service.

There you go. You agreed to Sprint's T&C by not only using their services, but paying for it as well, and you have failed to quote where Sprint violated their terms by putting device restrictions on certain plans.

You mention ethics quite a bit in this thread. Perhaps you need to brush up on the law. Ethics and law dont necessarily go hand in hand. Why? Because ethics are subjective. So far you have made dozens of accusations while not citing any law to back up your position. In fact, many including myself have cited law, including SCOTUS cases, in defense of Sprint. Yet you still rage on.

/sigh

This will probably be my last post in regards to this, unless of course you cite law or T&C that support your position.

Have a nice day, sir. Or ma'am. Whatever you are.