[rflrob]

> The (slightly) more interesting legal question might be whether AT&T could ask a prosecutor to bring criminal charges. My uninformed guess is they could, based on something like "theft of services." If I charged $20 a month for you to come fill up a one-gallon bucket any time you wanted from my well, and instead of a bucket you filled up a tanker truck, it would be theft plain and simple, because you'd knowingly be taking something from me without my permission.

What I don't understand is how they decide how much to charge for tethering, especially for the capped data plans. Presumably, whether you download 2GB of data straight to your phone vs. 2GB of data through your phone to your laptop doesn't affect their ability to provide network service, so why should they care? In that case, they're simply charging more because some people will pay it. I understand that, but it still rubs me the wrong way.

[gergles]

Their theory is that you'll never use 2 GB on your phone alone, so if you want to tether, you'll actually use close to 2GB, and well, that's an extra charge, citizen.

[noonespecial]

The problem is that they sold you "all the water you could carry" and then reneged when you pulled in with your truck (with the bucket they gave you duct-taped to the inlet with a hole in punched in the bottom).

Its a case of "wait! I didn't really mean all". Its the classic fat man at the buffet problem.

[tsotha]

>The problem is that they sold you "all the water you could carry" and then reneged when you pulled in with your truck (with the bucket they gave you duct-taped to the inlet with a hole in punched in the bottom).

What they sold you is in the contract, which specifies non-tethered data access. To continue your water analogy, they sold you all the water you could carry in that bucket, and you signed a contract saying you wouldn't try to connect the bucket to anything else.

This is really straightforward contract law. If you want to do something, don't sign a contract promising you won't do it.