Embattled and beleaguered internet service provider Clearwire is facing a class action lawsuit filed by former customers, stemming from the service provider’s implementation of QoS controls late last year meant to address network capacity and bandwidth issues due to the unexpected growth and demand for its WiMax-based internet service, which it sells as a home and mobile broadband service. The implementation of the controls proved problematic, as speeds dropped to 256kbps and customers that were not supposed to be capped or throttled, were suddenly faced with 10GB caps and throttling.
The suit alleges that Clearwire is effectively operating as a Ponzi scheme by claiming that the service provider intentionally oversold its services to build the capital needed for network expansion, while also accusing the provider of false advertising by failing to provide the minimum 1Mbps access spelled out in its advertising for the service.The suit stretches across six states in the US, where Clearwire stands accused of violating advertising and fair trade laws.
This follows the sudden resignation of now former CEO Bill Morrow yesterday, citing “personal issues†while the company is undergoing financial turmoil as a result of a lack of capital for its operations. The company is also in a long-running dispute with Sprint regarding revenue sharing from WiMax network access by Sprint’s customers while it seeks to amend the current agreement and seeks buyers for its excess spectrum to build capital.
One less choice, sad to see them failing:
Just two months ago, I came across a SoCal CLEARWIRE Mall-kiosk, the representative was very nice, he demonstrated the hardware line up and the pricing structure and a supporting coverage-location map of their website, however; what alarmed me was the fact that the live demo was not once 4G, never exceeding 3G, reminded me of pre-booster era SPRINT, having stores in locations with very poor if any coverage, thankfully that recollection, prevented me from undertaking any further action.
In an ironic twist, this will be critical for SPRINT’s 4G, likely pushing it further into the arms of LTE.
Thank You
Lol, I knew this would happen eventually. Serves them right. First they charge for 4G even if you have no way to get 4G in your area. Then they add the stupid fee to 3G phones too, even if you have an unlimited plan and your phone has previously been active on your current plan.
Phoneman, that was Sprint doing the charging on Sprint 4G devices, not Clearwire.
Clearwire only wanted to bill Sprint for Sprint 4G devices that used 4G service (on Clearwire’s network) in a given month.
Well with Sprint being the majority owner of Clearwire, I look at them as one and the same.
Sprint should absolutely be named in this class action though.
While I understand the sentiment, Clearwire is separate from Sprint in this matter.
Sprint has added the notion of throttling 4G customers, but like Verizon, has not exercised it yet. If Sprint were to throttle customers who previously signed on before throttling was added to the ToS, then they would have to be let out of their contracts.
In this particular case however, the only customers that have been throttled are Clear 4G Home customers. And, those who are month-to-month customers probably don’t have a legal leg to stand on, as they are not locked into a commitment, and can either return/sell their gear.
I predict in short order, one of two things will occur,
either SPRINT will buy out CLEARWIRE completely or they will pull out with significant losses and subsequently turn to LTE, in that case, most likely T-Mobile would be out of the picture for good.
Thank You
Is this the same suit?
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2011/03/lawsuit-says-sprint-overcharging-for-its-premium-data-service.html
That one says it is Sprint being sued, for basically the reasons I was talking about earlier.
Did they get it wrong or is that a different suit?
That’s quite obviously a different lawsuit.
While I agree on the lawsuit being different, I do very much appreciate the informative link, of particular interest to me was the inclusion of dozens of so called “Unlimited Data” plans, which should cover millions of legacy account holders, who in turn are hindered of switching to the hardware of their choice, i.e. any variation of “Smartphones”!
I guess one step at the time, meanwhile enjoy the latest misguided SPRINT AD:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/12/sprints-dan-hesse-differentiates-between-unlimited-and-unlimit/
Mind you that all E.P. is subject to the ‘premium data’ $10 no discount eligible charge. Sorry for going off topic.
Thank You
F1 on March 11th, 2011, 4:22 pm
I predict in short order, SPRINT…subsequently turn to LTE..
Ladies and Gentlemen I present to you:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/16/sprint-project-leapfrog-rumors-claim-lte-network-upgrade-is-un/
Thank You
Two things. If you don’t have 4G coverage and opt to get the phone anyway that’s on you. Same goes for all the other carriers 3G and HSPA+ services plus Verizon’s LTE. An adult not being able to stop themselves from buying a phone they can’t get a certain coverage for but want anyways is hard to feel sympathy for. But second the charge isn’t surprising as all the other carriers are/will do it aswell. Sprint’s mistake is trying to act like it isn’t a 4G charge. Newsflash: These same arguments were made when 3G came. First adopters charge basically while the device portfolio/coverage is expanded with the money to pull in new and existing customers to the higher costing userbase.
F1 T Mobile out of the picture for good…didn’t just say that the other day? http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/20/atandt-agrees-to-buy-t-mobile-from-deutsche-telekom/&category=classic&icid=eng_latest_art
ThankYou