Sprint Plans Banning Tethering in 2010

[kayawire]

Here's the link...

Sprint to Ban Tethering on Smartphones Next Year, Other Plans Revealed | PhoneNews.com

This is not good

 

[Fake Name]

Is that good?

From what I saw it wount really impact me much, or many others...

 

[andrewcgrimm]

This PAM or tethering has never been compatible with the everything plans:

Everything Data Plans
Simply Everything Plan

Since 2006 the PAM has been a premium service that sprint has charged a $15 MRC

 

[shadrap]

With android being as open as it is. I don't think Sprint can do much of anything to stop tethering, the people hacking it are a lot smarter than the ones trying to stop it. If they find out you are still tethering, what are they gonna do? Do you think they are gonna cancel your account, just for you to leave and go to another carrier and pay them $69 or more a month.

I don't think so. This dog just ain't gonna bite.

 

[andrewcgrimm]

With android being as open as it is. I don't think Sprint can do much of anything to stop tethering, the people hacking it are a lot smarter than the ones trying to stop it.

No they cannot stop tethering at the phone level.

If they find out you are still tethering, what are they gonna do? Do you think they are gonna cancel your account, just for you to leave and go to another carrier and pay them $69 or more a month.

I don't think so. This dog just ain't gonna bite.

Yes actually they will. It is a direct violation of your SA(service agreenment) and Terms and Conditions that you signed when you purchased the plan/phone.. I know this since I take calls on this exact issue. Also they can and will cancel you contract and charge an ETF.


However i have tether all my smart phones including the HTC Hero successfully without paying for it for over 3 years

 

[shadrap]

Sprint can remove features from a phone which enable it to tether. They also can implement roadblocks, or ask that you use specific plans.

However, under the Comcast/BitTorrent ruling from the FCC, a provider cannot punish you for working around those restrictions. A carrier cannot block any specific application on the internet, including the personal use of tethering on a single device.

As such, yes, Sprint can remove tethering from phones. But, legally, there

 

[andrewcgrimm]

there will always be a workarround

Wimo: Regedit
Android: SDK, Drivers, Proxy, and a little command prompt to enable port forwarding (by far the funnest way to use pam)
Palm: 3rd party app installed on comp

 

[bray424]

However, under the Comcast/BitTorrent ruling from the FCC, a provider cannot punish you for working around those restrictions. A carrier cannot block any specific application on the internet, including the personal use of tethering on a single device.

Does that mean something like PdaNet should continue to work?

 

[Edaze55]

Sprint can remove features from a phone which enable it to tether. They also can implement roadblocks, or ask that you use specific plans.

However, under the Comcast/BitTorrent ruling from the FCC, a provider cannot punish you for working around those restrictions. A carrier cannot block any specific application on the internet, including the personal use of tethering on a single device.

As such, yes, Sprint can remove tethering from phones. But, legally, there

 

[punkzanyj]

Sprint would techincally be electronicly tresspassing if they were to remove anything from my phone that I didnt give constent for. I realize they snuck in code for this on WebOS, but I dont care what phone, or what OS is being used, if its removed from my phone, they will be breaking the law.

Its MY phone. Its THEIR network. Cancel my account if you must, but stay out of my stuff.

UNLESS you've already signed away that right in the user agreement. Odds are, that was in the fine print, and since you agreed to it, it's not trespassing.

 

[andrewcgrimm]

Sprint would techincally be electronicly tresspassing if they were to remove anything from my phone that I didnt give constent for. I realize they snuck in code for this on WebOS, but I dont care what phone, or what OS is being used, if its removed from my phone, they will be breaking the law.

Its MY phone. Its THEIR network. Cancel my account if you must, but stay out of my stuff.

Their not removing anything from YOUR phone. If it is removed it will be removed long before its released.

True its your phone, but you are breaking YOUR and THEIR contact.

But its not really a big deal. Given time any smart phone that gets in the right hands can be altered, tailered and made to do what the end user wants

 

[peestandingup]

Haha, good luck to them. As long as phones are able to talk to computers via USB, Bluetooth, etc, they'll never be able to do it.

The hackers are always 2 steps ahead.

 

[Edaze55]

Their not removing anything from YOUR phone. If it is removed it will be removed long before its released.

True its your phone, but you are breaking YOUR and THEIR contact.

But its not really a big deal. Given time any smart phone that gets in the right hands can be altered, tailered and made to do what the end user wants

So what you are basicly saying is that if my ISP (Comcast) didnt like something that I was doing... lets say P2P filesharing, they would have the right to remove it from my system? Because it was in the EULA? I think not. Its the same thing. They arent autherized. Its criminal electronic tresspassing. You can slice it and dice it any way you see fit, but try removing something from one of their devices/systems/whatever. You'll land your butt in jail. Its a two way street.

The most they could legally do, is ban you from thier network. Im willing to bet that this would hold up in a court of law.

Also, FYI, I have PDANet on my phone. Its been there almost as long as I have had the phone. So it IS already there. I'd like to see them remove that without backlash and/or lawsuits. Im sure Im not the only one with it on my system.

 

[pdragon]

The most they could legally do, it ban you from thier network. Im willing to bet that this would hold up in a court of law.

The trouble with that, and most cases like this, is do you have the money to stand up to them in court?

 

[Edaze55]

The trouble with that, and most cases like this, is do you have the money to stand up to them in court?

Im sure many a lawyer would love the chance at a class action lawsuit.

 

[andrewcgrimm]

So what you are basicly saying is that if my ISP (Comcast) didnt like something that I was doing... lets say P2P filesharing, they would have the right to remove it from my system? Because it was in the EULA? I think not. Its the same thing. They arent autherized. Its criminal electronic tresspassing. You can slice it and dice it any way you see fit, but try removing something from one of their devices/systems/whatever. You'll land your butt in jail. Its a two way street.

The most they could legally do, is ban you from thier network. Im willing to bet that this would hold up in a court of law.

Also, FYI, I have PDANet on my phone. Its been there almost as long as I have had the phone. So it IS already there. I'd like to see them remove that without backlash and/or lawsuits. Im sure Im not the only one with it on my system.

Ok im confused ,, because I never stated that they were gonna remove a file from the phone. Maybe I cant read my own post, so please show me where I typed that.

So please READ my post that I have quoted here :

Their not removing anything from YOUR phone. If it is removed it will be removed long before its released.

True its your phone, but you are breaking YOUR and THEIR contact.

But its not really a big deal. Given time any smart phone that gets in the right hands can be altered, tailered and made to do what the end user wants

And tell me where I said they were removing a file from the device.

Also the EULA will hold up in ANY COURT. It was written by lawyers for the soul purpose of saving the publishers butt

If you actually sit and read the EULA insted of just clicking next you would see where the publisher actually owns the rights to the software not the end user

 

[andrewcgrimm]

UNLESS you've already signed away that right in the user agreement. Odds are, that was in the fine print, and since you agreed to it, it's not trespassing.

Thank you punkzanyj.. Most people dont understand that even though it just a SA for a cell phone,, its still a legally binding contract between you(the end user) and the service provider(Sprint). There is fine print and Terms and Conditions.

 

[Edaze55]

Ok im confused ,, because I never stated that they were gonna remove a file from the phone. Maybe I cant read my own post, so please show me where I typed that.

So please READ my post that I have quoted here :


And tell me where I said they were removing a file from the device.

Also the EULA will hold up in ANY COURT. It was written by lawyers for the soul purpose of saving the publishers butt

If you actually sit and read the EULA insted of just clicking next you would see where the publisher actually owns the rights to the software not the end user

Oh Im well aware of what a EULA is, but thanks for trying to make it seem like I didnt.

And while you didnt say they would be removing apps or files, remote app removal has already been put into the Palm OS. So it would not be a huge stretch to try and extend that to other OSs.

webOS 1.2 Brings LED Notifications, Remote App Removal

If this sort of thing sits well with you, good for ya, but its not something that I would stand for.

Thank you punkzanyj.. Most people dont understand that even though it just a SA for a cell phone,, its still a legally binding contract between you(the end user) and the service provider(Sprint). There is fine print and Terms and Conditions.

Where did anyone say it wasnt a binding contract? Now who's not reading posts? See what I did there.

The both of you are assuming that we signed away the right to legally allow a phone company the right to remove software from a device that they dont own or operate when we got our contract. So please, would one of you two kindly find that gem, if it exists, and present that to the rest of the class? And Im not talking about finding something that says they can update software on the phone. Completely different than removing something.

I would also like to see how David Owens actually worded it. Cause the original link states they plan to ban tethering in 2010, while the link inside that says

No tethering for phones that require Everything plans (such as all smartphones) from here on out.

Which isnt any different than what we already have. So if someone has the actual webchat, I'd very much like to see that.

 

[natrixgli]

I'm sure as far as Sprint is concerned you can have the software installed. But if you use it over their network, you are violating their policies. If you have a laptop connected it's not like your phone stops checking your mail, updating your weather/clock/calendar, etc. So you're using more than your share of the network.

You can't have it both ways, if you want cheap unlimited data plans you have to accept that they're designed for the device you bought it with only. They sell other devices you can use with your laptop, and pay for your bandwidth accordingly.

Besides, isn't the whole point of a smart phone to not need a computer in tow?

I am officially anti-tethering, especially since it wasn't offered as part of the plan or the phone, and definitely if it means less bandwidth available for those of us who do follow the rules.

The last thing I want is my carrier blocking ports, throttling, etc. because a bunch of people are hacking their phones so they can use more network than they paid for. I'd feel the same way if someone moved into my building and took up all the parking spaces with seven cars, a caravan, and a boat.


-n8

 

[elguapo76]

This is ridiculous of of Sprint to adopt this policy now. It's really backward thinking! We pay $30 a month for data and we cannot connect it to our other devices? It's almost down right insane! With 4g almost here Sprint should actually be really considering this option, they might actually cut into Cable, DSL, FIOS costumer base. Charge something reasonable like $10 for the option in addition to regular data charges. Cap it at 7gb for 3g and 15-20gb for 4g a month. They will make their money up in sheer numbers and might actually gain costumers for a change. Instead they are choosing of pushing their expensive Mifi and usb adapters, for the most part only business users who really need it are able to afford this. It's only a matter of time before someone innovates on this opportunity (Google) and Sprint loses it's chance altogether. Move forward not backward!

 

[natrixgli]

Instead they are choosing of pushing their expensive Mifi and usb adapters, for the most part only business users who really need it are able to afford this.

Good for Sprint. I don't want to have to compete for bandwidth with a bunch of people watching netflix movies and playing online games.

It's a smartphone, the data plans are designed to cater to the phone, not to the phone AND a computer. Computers, especially those running Windows, have potential to suck a lot more data when compared to the phone itself.

It's a good idea especially since so many people running Windows are unknowingly part of botnets constantly streaming data in/out.

-n8

 

[elguapo76]

Good for Sprint. I don't want to have to compete for bandwidth with a bunch of people watching netflix movies and playing online games.

It's a smartphone, the data plans are designed to cater to the phone, not to the phone AND a computer. Computers, especially those running Windows, have potential to suck a lot more data when compared to the phone itself.

It's a good idea especially since so many idiots running Windows are unknowingly part of botnets constantly streaming data in/out.

-n8

That's why you cap it at a reasonable amount. Expand the network capability with profits. The amount we pay for data is ridiculous for the amount of data most people actually use.

 

[pdragon]

Good for Sprint. I don't want to have to compete for bandwidth with a bunch of people watching netflix movies and playing online games.

It's a smartphone, the data plans are designed to cater to the phone, not to the phone AND a computer. Computers, especially those running Windows, have potential to suck a lot more data when compared to the phone itself.

It's a good idea especially since so many people running Windows are unknowingly part of botnets constantly streaming data in/out.

-n8

Totally agree with you that you shouldn't be hindered by people burdening the network. But if they continue advertising unlimited data, that should mean that people as a whole aren't straining the network so you have nothing to worry about. If it is straining the network, they should change to a Tiered pricing model instead of unlimited for everyone. Keep the price low for the average user and charge the people actually using the bandwidth. Spreading the cost around to everyone is the most ineffective way of running the network and making a profit at the same time.

 

[CRPercodani]

Every provider caps around 5GB. You can't really expect them to let you have unlimited GB and tethering when there is only so much to go around. Just cuz it is in the air doesn't mean it is unlimited. Charging $15 for tethering is really cheap compared to AT&T or Verizon so that is a good deal. If you really want it is so easy to work around them trying to block it, but you could risk losing your service. Also do you think it is fair for you to clog up the network because you wanna download torrents, and then 50 other users can't even make a call without it being dropped? Whether it is 4G or 3G doesn't matter because there is only so many slots open at any given time. Be happy that Sprint has some really cheap plans and don't complain about something that isn't even included and your not supposed to be doing.

 

[romeosidvicious]

Let's clear some things up. Comcast/p2p wasn't a ruling at all. Comcast started traffic shaping based on content. The FCC without any legal standing at all told them to knock it off. Comcastt knocked it off because they didn't want to push the FCC into creating net neutrality regulations which is already happening. This precedent doesn't affect whether or not you can tether a smart phone as it's not filtering based on content as it is highly unlikely that Sprint can tell that the data calls originated from your laptop tethered to your phone. In short net neutrality won't affect your ability to tether one way or another.

What Sprint can do is use DMCA claims against those who root their Android phones in order to tether. The DMCA provides protection for DRMd systems which the bootloader on the Android most certainly is. This takes things a ste farther and could possibly make rooting phones a criminal offense under the DMCA. It would be a stretch but I promise Sprint has more money to hand lawyers than any of us do. I doubt they would go this route but it is possible.

The remote software removal, such as the new WebOS announcement, is only for apps bought in the respective app stores and is in the agreement for the app store in question. It is meant to protect the provider's networks and the end user against malicious applications but we all know that's not necessarily how it will be used. So far no provider can remove apps that you didn't get through the app store not even the iPhone and Apple is infamous for their attempts to control their devices. They break rooted phones on a regular basis but they still can't remove apps that didn't originate from the app store. I imagine that after the next WebOS update there will be a new EULA from the app store where you will agree to let them remove apps you purchase or you won't be able to purchase apps.

Sprint won't be able to stop tethering unless they start invoking DMCA restrictions and trying to stop rooting. If they block the phones' ability to tehter and you hack the phone to make it tether they can cancel your contract including invoking early termination fees, possibly pursue criminal charges under DMCA provisions, and even sue you for the remainder of your contract and damages under contract law. In short they have many ways of enforcing the agreement you signed that includes your agreement not to tether.