[orangekid]

as a mod point, please be courteous to other users and C & D from name-calling and other puerile methods of point proving. If you have resorted to such base communication techniques, chances are you lack the cranial capacity to intelligently argue your point.

Now here's my take:


Personally I am not in favor of any court ordering a company not to charge a fee if it does not violate the TOS the customer agrees to, which you all did when purchasing your Evo or Epic.

This would set a negative precedent of court ordering companies to do certain things and gets into a whole other debate on socialism.

If you ran a company and wanted to charge $10 a month extra for something, you certainly wouldn't want uncle sam telling you that you can't do that for whatever reason if you are not violating TOS.

Personally I don't like the $10 add-on if I were on Sprint. I pay $60 a month with t-mobile for the same/better phones with HSPA+ "4G" (faster than wimax) and I wouldn't migrate to Sprint to pay $20 more for a slower 4G.

The point is, there are other carriers with other plans. Suing a company because you don't like what they charge seems rather ludicrous to me. Why are they charging $10 a month? The simple answer is because they can, but since there are 3 other major carriers and about a billion smaller ones that ride networks you can always move to another network

"But I don't use 4G"

flash your Evo on Cricket or Boost, pay $45 a month for unlimited everything, be inventive. Don't buy that $10 beer at the game, but use it on your phone which you use all day every day

But that's just me though,