Skip to main content

FTC Sues AT&T Over Data Plans


The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced yesterday that it has filed a federal court complaint against AT&T Mobility, LLC, for what it alleges are deceptive practices related to the company’s unlimited data plan for smartphones. At issue is AT&T’s practice of “throttling,” or reducing data speeds after customers reach a monthly data limit. In many cases, speeds were reduced by 80 to 90 percent, making functions like audio and video streaming virtually impossible. The complaint charges that AT&T failed to adequately disclose this practice, which effectively imposes a limitation on the company’s “unlimited” data plan. The FTC is seeking “permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of ill-gotten monies, and other equitable relief” for practices in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).

Although the FTC was created in 1914 to address widespread concerns about trusts and anticompetitive business practices, it also serves as a consumer protection agency, frequently targeting deceptive practices in advertising. Section 5(a) of the FTC Act prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.” One famous instance of its use was in a 2004 case involving advertisements for KFC that touted the putative health benefits of the company’s chicken. That case ended in a consent order prohibiting KFC from making any representation that eating its fried chicken “is better for a consumer’s health than eating a Burger King Whopper,” or that it is “compatible with ‘low carbohydrate’ weight loss programs.” Another famous case involved the Airborne Health company, which sold an effervescent tablet that it claimed would reduce the risk of colds and other illnesses. The result was a settlement for $30 million to provide refunds to Airborne’s customers.

To learn more about the FTC, see this brief history, or visit the agency’s website at http://www.ftc.gov.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.