T-Mobile Settles Text Message Banning Lawsuit

from the and-so-the-rest-of-us-are-left-in-the-dark dept

So just a short while after so much attention was paid to the question of whether or not it's legal for mobile operators to block text messages that contain content they don't like, the answer is... that we have no legal answer. T-Mobile and EZ Texting have settled their lawsuit without any ruling on the overall issue. Still, this could be good, in that mobile operators must now be aware that even if they do want to block certain messages, they're likely to have to go to court to defend that decision.

Filed Under: free speech, text messages
Companies: ex texting, t-mobile

Starbucks Staffer Claims He Was Fired For Turning Off WiFi To Block Porn Watchers

from the or-you-could-ask-them-to-leave dept

One of the common complaints we heard in the early days of "free WiFi" in cafes, restaurants and libraries was the claim that people would "just use it to view porn." It seemed like an odd claim, because how many people really want to display to the world their porn viewing habits? There's a reason why porn magazines were delivered in brown paper wrappings. However, I'm sure that there will always be some people who do use it that way. Apparently some of them were at a Starbucks recently, and an exasperated barista decided the best response was to pull the plug on the WiFi -- an act for which he claims he was fired. Indeed. It does make you wonder why he didn't just ask them to stop surfing porn.

Filed Under: porn, wifi
Companies: starbucks

Verizon Wireless To Pay $90 Million Back To Users For $1.99 Data Fees It Insisted It Never Wrongly Charged

from the well,-look-at-that dept

Well, well, well. For over a year now there have been widespread reports of how Verizon Wireless would charged users $1.99 for data services, even if they have data services turned off. This was happening sometimes to users with phones turned off or even batteries drained. The whole thing was incredibly questionable. Verizon customer service folks insisted that the people in question clearly accessed the internet, but there were so many reports that they had not, that this response didn't fly. Then, after the NY Times reported about it, the FCC finally woke up and asked Verizon Wireless to explain. Its response was basically a non-response, insisting that it had done nothing wrong -- and when David Pogue from the NY Times pushed the company about the over 400 accounts of it happening to his readers (and himself), Verizon Wireless' response was "I'm going to let the letter to the F.C.C. speak for us," repeated for every question Pogue asked.

That was in December of last year. Now, ten months later, Verizon has just announced that it's going to pay back "up to" $90 million in such bogus fees that it never should have charged to about 15 million subscribers. Apparently, those claims of not having done stuff wrong... well... it looks like that wasn't the case. It looks like they incorrectly charged people to the tune of perhaps $90 million (the company apparently thinks it could be more like $50 million once they've found all the false charges). Seems like a pretty big "accident," which they denied for so long. The latest statement suggests that Verizon Wireless "just" noticed these errors while "reviewing customer accounts," but given the number of complaints, and the fact that it's been going on for so long, including massive press coverage and an FCC investigation, you would think the company would have figured this out sooner.

Speaking of the FCC, it appears that it's not entirely satisfied with this customer refund, as the head of the FCC's enforcement bureau (or some PR staffer working there) amusingly quipped that the FCC was: "gratified to see the repayment, but for millions of Americans it's a day late and a $1.99 short."

Filed Under: data fees, fees, returns
Companies: fcc, verizon wireless