[Nottingham] HTC One S

[Brian Pickford]

> On 20/11/12 15:55, David Aldred wrote:
>
> >> Personally, I'm happy with phone companies setting a data cap
> >> (for now), as not doing so would be impractical. However, I'm not
> >> happy with them telling us what we can and can't do with that
> >> allowance, and I'm not happy with them inspecting our traffic to
> >> make sure we're obeying their rules. In the same way that I
> >> wouldn't be happy with a PC or OS vendor telling me what software
> >> I'm allowed to run on my device. Internet access should be free
> >> from these sorts of restrictions. It's called network
> >> neutrality. I'm going to use my 500MB monthly allowance however I
> >> see fit.
> >
> > Hmm.  It's your choice, of course, but I'd say that if you have a
> > contract with someone, you're as subject to the contract as they
> > are.
>
> Legally yes. In any other aspect, no. I treat contracts that I have
> with small businesses, my employer and individuals very differently to
> the contracts I have with billion dollar telecoms companies, and so
> should you.
>
> > If you enter into the contract, abide by it.  If you find the
> > terms unacceptable, don't sign up to them: go and find a supplier
> > who agrees with you (after making it clear to the supplier you
> > won't deal with exactly why you won't).
>
> I don't think that telling T-Mobile that I disagree with their ethics,
> and then going to a different company that behaves exactly the same
> will be very fruitful.
>
> > Your post does rather as though you want your supplier to be all
> > ethical and respect net neutrality, but you don't see fit to apply
> > ethics to your side of the contract.
>
> They are a business. They don't have ethics.


I run a business, I have ethics in business and personally  I'm not too
badly bruised by this sweeping general-ism  so I won't pretend otherwise,
but it is the same general-ism you complain of below ...

I don't want them to, "be
> all ethical", I want them to be forced to abide by network neutrality
> through legislation, and I will use technology to achieve a similar
> result until then.
>

I have some sympathy if the ISP is monitoring our data beyond that which is
required to comply with the law. I don't want that invasion of privacy.


> > Yes, I know, ethics are *so* 1950s.....
>
> Rather than implying that I have no ethics, why not acknowledge that
> they're just different to yours instead?
>

Agreements are important to everyday life, we need them to function. The
use of tethering where it has been excluded from the agreement is not
pivotal imo as the practicalities of the connection and the caps in place
take precedence.

I see it a more like keeping a recording from the TV for longer than 14
days than say insurance fraud. That said, I still agree with David here
that if the terms of a deal are not you your liking, reject the deal or
accept and comply with the terms.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/nottingham/attachments/20121120/8636d7eb/attachment.html>