quote:

Originally posted by crazedcanuck I don't see what the big deal is here. Even those of you slaggin rogers as cheap asses contradict yourselves. Rogers is simply warning him that if his level of usage continues, he'll be put on probation. This likely means he'll still have normal service, but monitored to make sure he's not bandwidth hogging. Only if his disgusting lvl of usage continues will he be charged any extra fees, and that seems to be quite a few steps away from happening. As a company, they seem to be handling this fairly, and with class. It's not like they gave him a huge bill for breaking the contract and threatened him with payup or be cut off. If he wants the level of service he seems to need/use, then he should upgrade. There is no way he can be using that much with normal household usage, unless he's done some serious tweaking to his conection to get such a fast downstream... the average movie file is 700,000kb, so he's dling say 3-5 movies a day.. a bit much... (I'd like to know which filesharing prog he's using though heh)

The whole point is that if Rogers has no clause in their contract about how much bandwidth you use, then they can't say jack shit. thats what everyone is trying to imply. Iam with Rogers and yesterday they tried to screw me out of $200 dollars. after 10 minutes on the phone, i got it pushed down to $50 cause they were making some mistakes. Rogers just tries to be cheap. its in their blood. And yes they are going to cap users come the new year. so by then, I will go with another provider. oh and it is possible to dl that much info. just use some ftp'ing, kazza and trust me, you can dl quite a bit of info in a day. I do it all the time.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by quddha Actually, I think look.ca has a specified bandwidth limit.

Hmmm...I should check that out.

___________________

This thread really isn't about whether or not you like Rogers as a corporation. The question is whether or not they were in the wrong in this situation.

Forget about how "shady" the clause is, or how crappy their customer services is, just look at this situation as an isolated case and answer these questions:

1) Who signed the contract?
2) "Unlimited" Internet access is a word that goes back to dialup days when people's time on the 'net was limited. Do you think that this automatically applies to transfer amounts?
3) Is 4-5 gigs a night (120-150 a month) excessive?
4) If your answer to (3) is "no", then how much would you consider excessive, where you draw the line, and who should have the final word?
5) Although it's unfair to assume that any of the data was illegal (ISOs, MP3s, movies, etc.), do you think that this number might at least warrant an investigation into the legal content of that data? Think of it as transferring unusually large amounts of money (in the billions) between bank accounts on a regular basis.
6) How much do you think that Rogers pays for 150 GB of bandwidth?
7) How much did they ask John's friend for?
8) In what other ways have they inconvenienced his friend?
9) If this customer represents a monetary loss to Rogers, what alternate course of action would you recommend to them?

If you can answer all those questions honestly and still say that Rogers is in the wrong, then maybe you'll have a case.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut This thread really isn't about whether or not you like Rogers as a corporation. The question is whether or not they were in the wrong in this situation. Forget about how "shady" the clause is, or how crappy their customer services is, just look at this situation as an isolated case and answer these questions: 1) Who signed the contract? 2) "Unlimited" Internet access is a word that goes back to dialup days when people's time on the 'net was limited. Do you think that this automatically applies to transfer amounts? 3) Is 4-5 gigs a night (120-150 a month) excessive? 4) If your answer to (3) is "no", then how much would you consider excessive, where you draw the line, and who should have the final word? 5) Although it's unfair to assume that any of the data was illegal (ISOs, MP3s, movies, etc.), do you think that this number might at least warrant an investigation into the legal content of that data? Think of it as transferring unusually large amounts of money (in the billions) between bank accounts on a regular basis. 6) How much do you think that Rogers pays for 150 GB of bandwidth? 7) How much did they ask John's friend for? 8) In what other ways have they inconvenienced his friend? 9) If this customer represents a monetary loss to Rogers, what alternate course of action would you recommend to them? If you can answer all those questions honestly and still say that Rogers is in the wrong, then maybe you'll have a case.

DIGINUT the TOTA Lawyer!!

___________________
http://www.travelninja.com
------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by TheDemon The whole point is that if Rogers has no clause in their contract about how much bandwidth you use, then they can't say jack shit. thats what everyone is trying to imply. Iam with Rogers and yesterday they tried to screw me out of $200 dollars. after 10 minutes on the phone, i got it pushed down to $50 cause they were making some mistakes. Rogers just tries to be cheap. its in their blood. And yes they are going to cap users come the new year. so by then, I will go with another provider. oh and it is possible to dl that much info. just use some ftp'ing, kazza and trust me, you can dl quite a bit of info in a day. I do it all the time.

Its not a specific clause about bandwidth usage, but it's considered abuse when you use so much that it affects other people on the node. There is no set soft-cap. Some people can download x amount while others can download y amount. It is relative to how much other people's performance is affected. They cover their asses. They can do anything they want.
Check this site out...
www.rbua.org
Also...
www.dslreports.com

According to the newsgroups - the max you are allowed to download in one day is 1 gig. There is a hidden clause in your contract saying that anytime they have the to limit your banwidth and the amount you d/l. D/ling 5 or 6 gigs a day is alot and of course they went after you. I am currently waiting for an email/letter from them cause I d/l close to 2 gigs a day.
I have so many friends working for Rogers and they are cracking down big time giving warning and sometimes making the person have a speed of 56k for 7 days.
Go to the newsgroups and there are people that work for rogers and they will tell you more and show you the hidden clause in your contract which makes it 100% legal. Anything over 1 gigs is abuse and you are using other people's bandwidth - thats what the clause kind of state. I go to the newsgroups all the time and there are alot of people complaining now.