Results 1 to 33 of 33
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160

    Lightbulb Unlimited webspace and bandwidth - from a legal view

    Hello all.

    Now before everyone starts flaming, I am not talking about supplying it.

    Now I am at uni and have just completed a unit on law (that's in the United Kingdom). Part of the unit involved the law of contract and how it works.

    Now, as I understand it, when you buy a hosting plan, it is a contract. Now if they say they have unlimited webspace, and you have say a 1gb website and they start complaining, they cannot close your account! Because in the contract its says Unlimited... However, there defence is that you are "monopolizing the resources.." and they could get away with it.

    BUT, lets take HostOnce.com as an example (they seem famous in this place).

    In their terms and conditions, we get:
    UNLIMITED USE POLICY
    High bandwidth usage: HostOnce.com offers an unlimited use policy by maintaining very large ratios of bandwidth per customer. In rare cases, HostOnce.com may find a customer to be using server resources to such an extent that he or she may jeopardize server performance and resources for other customers. In such instances, HostOnce.com reserves the right to impose the High Resource User Policy for the consideration of all customers.

    HIGH RESOURCE USER POLICY
    Resources are defined as bandwidth and/or processor utilization.
    HostOnce.com may implement the following policy to its sole discretion:

    When a website is found to be monopolizing the resources available HostOnce.com reserves the right to suspend that site immediately. This policy is only implemented in extreme circumstances and is intended to prevent the misuse of our servers. Customers may be offered an option whereby HostOnce.com continues hosting the website for an additional fee.
    See the problem is that we have no clue as to what would constitue as "high" usage. I mean, websites don't really require much server power. I mean I have yet to crash my Apache production server on my 1.2GHz laptop! So we can at this point ignore that.

    So moving on to bandwidth:
    ...We are connected to the Internet backbones at OC3 (155mbps) speed. To reduce the number of stops it takes to deliver your web pages to net users, we have direct access to major Internet backbones such as: UUNET, Sprint, ATT and Level 3. Using state-of-the-art BGP technology, our multiple high speed links balance network loads and automatically sends IP traffic down the shortest path. Heavy Web sites won't drag down the server. We are on MCI Worldcom OC48 network and ATT OC12 network.
    Right, so based on the above information (which would be the only information available for the offer to treat), they have a lot of bandwidth. Now if you end up using 5GB of bandwidth a month, which is not a lot! And they start to complain, and shut off your site, you could take them to court for compensation because they broke the terms of the contract...
    [list=1][*]They say they offer you unlimited but have clearly not.[*]You have not broken the terms of the contract - you are not monopolising resources.[/list=1]

    What do you guys think? Could a lawyer please check this out and see what they think? I mean am I right (So far I have been getting "Firsts" in my units")?
    - Abbas

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,046

    well

    im not a lawyer , but it looks like a "at will" agreement to me. Which basically means , if they feel you are over using there bandwidth for whatever reason it may be , they have the legal right to yank the cord on your site . the contract seems to be upfront:

    UNLIMITED USE POLICY
    High bandwidth usage: HostOnce.com offers an unlimited use policy by maintaining very large ratios of bandwidth per customer. In rare cases, HostOnce.com may find a customer to be using server resources to such an extent that he or she may jeopardize server performance and resources for other customers. In such instances, HostOnce.com reserves the right to impose the High Resource User Policy for the consideration of all customers.

    HIGH RESOURCE USER POLICY
    Resources are defined as bandwidth and/or processor utilization.
    HostOnce.com may implement the following policy to its sole discretion:

    When a website is found to be monopolizing the resources available HostOnce.com reserves the right to suspend that site immediately. This policy is only implemented in extreme circumstances and is intended to prevent the misuse of our servers. Customers may be offered an option whereby HostOnce.com continues hosting the website for an additional fee.


    There it is , if THEY feel your slowing up the line or the server , they can yank you , they'll give you the option to pay more prior to pulling the account . It doesnt look like these type of plans are for intense bandwidth and processor usage anyways , with the exception of the reseller plan , the other 2 plans are under 5 dollars . So my answer to the question is no , they have done nothing illegal , not to mention , what can you expect for 5 dollars ? excuse me , less then 5 dollars for an account ? If you dont like "unlimited bandwidth" providers , dont sign up with them , if you feel the company can come thru for your needs , just make sure the contract isnt so gray , then again this company has done an excellent job protecting themselves by have people agree to a "at will" (type of) agreement .Im not saying its right , its obvious this isnt everyones favorable type of advertising , i dont like it , but who am i to judge =]
    Last edited by case; 06-07-2002 at 03:57 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    Hello, and thanks for the reply.

    I agree, but "This policy is only implemented in [B]extreme[/B circumstances and is intended to prevent the misuse of our servers. Customers may be offered an option whereby HostOnce.com continues hosting the website for an additional fee.. That just messed their defence.
    - Abbas

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,779

    Who is to define

    EXTREME?? They do, it is at their will to decide you are using an extreme amount of their resources say the avg site on that server was using .01% and you had a cgi script that ran for a blink of the eye and peaked cpu resources at .1% they could say you are using an extreme amount cpmpared to other users.

    I doubt you would win it in court, you might, but it is written to be so open ended it would be hard to prove.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    341
    Abbas,

    I've followed the whole "unlimited" discussion through many WebHostingTalk threads. But I've never commented until now. For the record, I agree with the anti-unlimited folks. It think it's misleading and web hosting companies should stay away from the claim.

    But advertisers have long gotten away with outrageous claims either via the use of "weasel words" (a term that marketing/advertising students will recognize), or exception clauses in contracts.

    A "weasel word" would be a word like "helps" in the marketing claim "our aspirin helps relieve pain." You can play a TV commercial for a brand of aspirin which makes that precise claim for 100 people in a room -- you can even play it twice -- and then ask all of them to write down what the product does, and the vast majority (something like 88% or so) of them will write down that the "aspirin relieves pain." Most will not have consciously heard the word "helps" -- at least not until you point it out to them -- and so "helps" is what advertisers call a "weasel word."

    An exception clause is the type of contractural language to which you refer in your original post.

    The issue you raise is much larger than most realize. In addition to the primary issue, there is also the question (still not completely decided by the courts yet) about whether any contract entered into by the mere act of clicking on something (as opposed to physically signing something) is even binding. I know what the common practice has become. And I know that some courts are beginning to hold that as long as the act of clicking in agreement can somehow be tied to a specific person -- either from a web log or whatever -- then it's probably closer to being binding than not. Still others say it doesn't matter; that the somewhat older practice of signifying one's accord with the seller's terms by going ahead and knowlingly partaking of the product or service which the seller is offering and exchanging consideration for it makes what they did or didn't click on irrelevant -- especially if the seller warned in advance that use signifies acceptance of the seller's terms. I realize that's not your primary issue, here, but in order for you to pick too many nits over the terms of the contract, a discussion of whether there even is a contract should probably be had as well.

    That notwithstanding, your argument on the merits is valid. It's soundness is something that only a court could decide. But it's certainly valid. However, before getting too bogged-down by the merits, I suggest you take one giant step back and contemplate the larger issues of enforceability, as described in your lawbooks. You say you have recently completed a course of study in contract law. Even though it's in the UK (as opposed to the US), I'm quite certain that your lawbooks contain a discussion of a contract's potential for being voidable or, worse, void, if one or more of its essential elements is overly vague or downright ambiguous. In the US, ambiguity is the chief cause for the terms of a given clause to be declared void and, therefore, for the terms of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) to prevail instead.

    It seems to me that much of the language and requisite conditions in the UNLIMITED USE and the HIGH RESOURCE USER policies that you presented are so ambiguous as to be prima facie voidable.

    The claim of "unlimited" either disk space or bandwidth is, itself, so clear and unambiguous, by definition, that to use it, it seems to me, makes any contract based upon it -- even when qualified with exception clauses like those you present -- facially unenforceable as a matter of law unless, in the end, it really is unlmited. Poorly-written exception clauses like those you present just makes the contract even more likely, in my opinion, to be declared void by a judge. They are, really, two separate issues.

    To prevail on this issue, in my opinion, you must make two arguments:

    First you must argue that the term "unlimited" is self-evident and wholly unambiguous. It is a superlative and, therefore, cannot be modified or made exception to. It has one and only one meaning to any reasonable person and, therefore, any attempts to redefine it (or, more importantly, to lessen the superlative nature of its meaning) with exception clauses is so misleading that it amounts to nothing short of fraud.

    And, secondly, you must argue that even if that were not true; that even if the Court permitted the seller to make the "unlimited" claim so long as he also set forth the specific conditions under which there actually could be a limitation, language like that which we see in the two policies which you presented simply lacks the specificity and failure to be ambiguous upon which parties to the contact, acting in good faith, would need to rely in order to execute their respective responsibilities as set forth therein.

    At least that's how I'd argue it.
    Last edited by DesElms; 06-07-2002 at 04:12 PM.
    Gregg L. DesElms

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    3,407
    At least that's how I'd argue it.
    Someone remembered their first year quite well.

    The counter arguement could be Terms vs Contract. Are Terms really contracts? Terms are not always contracts. But contracts will always have terms. A contract needs a fair, two sided list of terms. "Here is what you do/get. Here is what we do/get". How many web host Terms do this?

    The bottom line, is 'don't like - don't buy'.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    341
    Originally posted by UmBillyCord
    The bottom line, is 'don't like - don't buy'.
    I would amend thusly:

    Read carefully first. Then, don't like, don't buy.
    Gregg L. DesElms

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    3,407
    Originally posted by DesElms

    I would amend thusly:

    Read carefully first. Then, don't like, don't buy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    Hello all and thank you for your posts.

    DesElms, you have it correct.

    The fact is that wording of the contract is very important. I mean, I am about to start studying insurance and how to legally write contracts that would seem to be in the favour of the end user, but will inevitably be more advantage of the insurance company.

    I am interested in this subject so much that I think I will discuss this with my lecturer who is a practicing lawyer, who specialises in contracts...

    Anyway, has anyone taken a host to court on this matter?
    - Abbas

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Chicago, Illinios
    Posts
    391
    I had an "unlimited" account at FeaturePrice(www.featureprice.com) and when I was using 4GB of space they threatened to shut down my site. Then, a few days later, they shut down my site for using too much bandwidth.

    NEVER go with an unlimited host!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    341
    Originally posted by abbas
    I am about to start studying insurance and how to legally write contracts that would seem to be in the favour of the end user, but will inevitably be more advantage of the insurance company.
    A word of advice, if you'll permit it...

    As you embark on what appears to be the beginning of a legal career -- or at the very least the sort of business career that requires an above-average understanding of the law -- never approach the creation of contract language with anything less than deliberate forthrightness and good faith intentions. If you become an attorney, our legal system's basic principle of every man's right to an advocate may from time to time stretch your ethical sensibilities to their limits. At moments like that it will be your abiding faith in the canon of ethics to which you will have subscribed by oath -- and the accuracy with which you keep your moral compass pointed at it -- that may be the only thing that will permit you to sleep at night.

    Contract language should describe an arrangement that is mutually beneficial in both letter and spirit. An ethical man who nevertheless takes intentional advantage of his opponent even at the moment an agreement is struck nearly always lives to regret it. Nearly always.

    And even if you never become an attorney, honor has no oath requirement.
    Gregg L. DesElms

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    True. But as always, whenever a contract is drawn, both parties try and protect their interest as much as possible. I mean, if you were drawing a contract to say sell a game that you wrote to game publishers, you will of course want to make it as advantage as possible for you. I mean, you may try and write into the contract that you are still the sole rights owner and therefore able to also give the game publishing rights to other publishers.

    But you do make a good point.
    - Abbas

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    1

    Overselling "unlimited" or otherwise

    A host does not have to offer "unlimited" bandwidth or space in order to oversell their server capacity. That word is a red flag---yes!, but what I have learned by cruising these forums carefully is that many "reputable" hosts do the same. They just legitimize things by putting numbers to their offers.

    Overselling may be SOP, but when enough consumers get on the losing end of the practice, the lawsuits will inevitably begin. Like they did when airlines over-sold tickets under the premise that not everyone would show up for flights.

    Same principle, it seems.
    The courts ruled they had to compensate their customers and change their policies.

    The numbers game in hosting seems even more riddled with possibilities for litigation. At least an airliner has seats. One airplane, one-hundred seats = 100 person capacity. How many users fit on one server (same capacity)? 50? 500? "unlimited!"?

    Since consumers are paying in advance for services and expect those services to be delivered then just "shutting" down their sites is eventually gonna come back to haunt the whole industry.

    And I don't think "Jeez, Judge, everybody does it!" is a legal defense.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    And I don't think "Jeez, Judge, everybody does it!" is a legal defense.
    - Abbas

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    447
    Hi Abbas,
    in my opinion the decisive part of these terms of service is this:
    CANCELLATION AND REFUNDS
    HostOnce.com reserves the right to cancel the service at any time. In this event customers will be entitled to a pro rata refund based upon the remaining period of membership. If a customer contravenes HostOnce.com's terms of service a refund will not be issued in the event of a cancellation.
    They reserve the right to make an end to the contract anytime, with just a prorata refund for already paied hosting.

    If customer violates the TOS (which includes the unlimited / high bandwidth policy), then there'll be no refund.

    This means that if user does not violate the TOS (including the unlimited policy) they still reserve the right to make an end to the contract, all you'll get is that refund.

    So, to answer your question
    Now if you end up using 5GB of bandwidth a month, which is not a lot! And they start to complain, and shut off your site, you could take them to court for compensation because they broke the terms of the contract...
    In my opinion you could sue them for that prorata refund, but not for further compensation.

    Given that cancellation clause, the whole "unlimited policy" appears pretty much pointless...

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    Ok.

    And as I mentioned before, the TOS is geared towards benefiting the host more then the end client.....

    You are correct in saying that the unlimited policy ploy is a pointless one...
    - Abbas

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    447
    Originally posted by abbas
    I am about to start studying insurance and how to legally write contracts that would seem to be in the favour of the end user, but will inevitably be more advantage of the insurance company.
    You have classes where you learn to draft a text that doesn't mean what it seems to mean??

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Barcelona (Spain)
    Posts
    75

    Angry My experience as reseller

    Hi friends,

    I am a reseller and had a sad experience with DonHost. They removed me two accounts.

    First account was just mine and I was so surprised that I simply thought it was a mistake from my side. In this case I uploaded files for some 25 Mb just to be shared by a colleague.

    Second account was a client's. They uploaded a site of travels consisting of some 100 Mb of pictures, all of them web-accessible.

    I had no problems with first one because I had copies of all files. But I lost my face when my client announced me he had lost all pictures. Maybe it was not true but I had to refund all their money.

    I asked DonHost what happened; they said I had missused their resources. Obviously I closed my account with them.

    After some 4 months from that I think as follows...

    Maybe they were right to remove my 1st account for I was using their space as HD only. But they acted against their own policy because 2nd account used what they call "web space" (all files linked through the main web address).

    At that time I was thinking on taking them to Court but realized I couldn't prove anything. I even had no any e-mail announcing the deleting of the accounts...

    My costs have beeen:
    a) Refund to my client.
    b) This client will negatively promote my service.
    c) Cost of re-hosting my clients in the new server.

    Certainly I am not much motivated to do something against DonHost now but, just for my information, what could I do?

    Will appreciate your comments.

    Pere

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    160
    Hello.

    First a note: I have been talking to my law friends and lecturer, and basically advertsing "unlimited" webspace and bandwidth is legal in UK providing they have clauses in the TOS.

    Also, here in the UK, the term "monoploising resources" means using at least 25%, so they cannot claim you are doing so if you only use 24%. This includes bandwidth, which if you calculate as a montly figure can ammount to alot even if the host has a small T1 connection.

    Ok, as to your case:

    In the TOS

    First:
    2.3 We reserve the right to remove any material which we deem inappropriate from your Web Site without notice to you.
    .

    The important point here is that the don't need to give you notice so you can not go that way.

    As to the point of deleting your account:

    2.2 You represent, undertake and warrant to us that you will use the Web Site allocated to you only for lawful purposes. In particular, you represent, warrant and undertake to us that...

    2.2.5 any file you store on the Server will be reachable via a hyperlink from a page on your site.
    In other words, all files you store have to be linked via webpages. Now, if the files you had for your friend were linked via a webpage, then you do have a claim. You obviously have a reciept as to the provision of the service (credit card bill will suffice). Obviously, you have the proof of email regarding the termination of the service. You need to get the reason why. If it was because you did not link the files, the you do not have a case. If it was another reason, please tell me what it is.

    Hope it helps.
    - Abbas

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    447
    Originally posted by abbas
    here in the UK, the term "monoploising resources" means using at least 25%, so they cannot claim you are doing so if you only use 24%.
    25% of what?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    341
    Originally posted by abbas
    Also, here in the UK, the term "monoploising resources" means using at least 25%, so they cannot claim you are doing so if you only use 24%.
    Whoa! Stop the presses for a minute!

    What does the above statement mean, exactly? Does the UK actually have law on this subject? I mean, is there legislation in the UK regarding what the phrase "monopolizing resources" means when applied to such things as bandwidth? Or does it really apply to other resources and someone figured out that it would also apply to bandwidth? And what kind of law are we talking about, here? I mean... is it antitrust or something? What's the nature of it? Just curious.
    Gregg L. DesElms

  22. #22
    I havn't had any problems like you guys seem to..

    I pay $18 a month for a reseller hosting account (just to go with my design company) which is unlimited space and bandwidth etc. The company I resell for have 15 leased lines with unlimited usage, and they do hosting plans for win2k and linux, correct me if I'm wrong in any way here.

    They have never threatened to shut down me or any of the people I host, infact I havn't read any bad reviews about them. These do provide unlimited, there is such thing on these leased lines.

    You guys just need to find genuine hosts!

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    685
    Oh man, you've kicked the hornets nest. Do a search on this topic.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Napa, California
    Posts
    341
    Originally posted by WorldNET-Inc
    You guys just need to find genuine hosts!
    Man, have you ever stepped to the forefront in defense of a concept in the wrong place. The anti-unlimited movement here is downright rabid. And rightly so. There is, by definition, no such thing as unlimited. To say it's a misrepresentation is an understatement.

    And as the post immediately before this one implies, you're woefully misinformed. You really need to search for discussions in these forums about "unlimited" disk space and/or bandwidth/transfer hosting companies.

    Just because there are a few in this thread who aren't hitting the core issues as hard as others have in these forums, generally, doesn't mean this crowd is misinformed. Believe me, there are more than a few of us around here who know where to find the "genuine" hosts. It's you who doesn't get it. I'll reiterate: There is, by definition, no such thing as "unlimited." It's just folly. And you're the one who needs to do the finding... of facts about the matter that others have written in these forums over time, I mean.

    At best the term "unlimited" is a misnomer. Instead of "unlimited," what most hosting companies mean is that they won't spend a lot of time metering or, more accurately, keeping track of your usage or caring how much you use one way or the other until and unless they start noticing that the server on which your account is hosted begins to slow down or there's suddenly no disk space for other accounts or whatever other similar problems arise. Then they'll go back and figure out who the resource hog(s) is(are) and they'll tell 'em to knock it off of they'll cancel their account(s) -- if they even give 'em that much notice. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of a single word that can be used instead of "unlimited" which means all that. Neither can hosts who offer it, obviously. "Unmetered" has been tossed around, but that's not really a tight fit, either.

    I'm glad your "unlimited" host is working out for you. But obviously you're not pushing the envelope or, trust me, it woudn't be. And then you, too, would be here chastising those who espouse the virtues of "unlimited" hosts.

    I think the subject has been battled over so much that I'm not sure if you're going to get slammed like others I've seen who've voiced opinions like yours. But, as Rotifer suggests, search around for previous threads on the subject and you'll quickly become acquainted with the salient issues.
    Gregg L. DesElms

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Hollywood, CA
    Posts
    3,046

    un-metered

    of course unlimited is crazy , no one can provide that . Not to mention its a dirty word in the hosting industry . I think phpwebhosting.com has decent thought on the subject , and if more hosts did this , they probably wouldnt catch so much flak ... check this out .

    We offer "un-metered" transfer(bandwidth). Is this the same thing as "un-limited"? Not at all. Beware of anyone offering "unlimited" bandwidth. No quality webhost can offer unlimited bandwidth.

    We offer fast, un-throttled, true burstable bandwidth. We do not place limits on your site's bandwidth (many hosts offer "unlimited" bandwidth but severely restrict the number of kbytes/second flowing out of your website). We work very hard to ensure that all of our customers bandwidth needs can be met under our $9.95/month plan, however we do have several important restrictions:


    No porn
    No warez (aka pirated/cracked software)
    No file archives/download only sites (click the link for examples and faqs about this)

    We are proud of both the speed of our servers and the low prices we offer our customers. However to continue offering the low prices that we do, we cannot accomodate users offering the above types of files (why? like-it-or-not, the above types of sites are popular and quickly consume lots of bandwidth!). If you begin offering any of the above on your site we reserve the right to:

    first, throttle your bandwidth and
    second, ask you to leave (and by "ask", we mean "require").
    Our network is fully burstable (meaning that our network connections grow dynamically to meet demand during peak times). However burstable bandwidth is expensive and we will not tolerate abuses.
    anyways , i would never sign up for unlimited bandwidth , but i did use phpwebhosting , and un-metered is a lot more real then unlimited , plus terms like these are very easy to understand , if more hosts used this phrase , it wouldnt be so confusing , not to mention , they wouldnt be lying .

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    158
    second, ask you to leave (and by "ask", we mean "require").
    i find that sentance pathetic. if you mean require, say require. simple as that.
    http://www.boredomkillers.com - Boredom Killers: Coming Soon. Never be bored again!

  27. #27

    Angry Caveat Emptor

    The main reason these hosts snare so many people is that they appeal to people without much business sense. If you are going to use the kind of bandwidth that will get you kicked off by the unlimitted brigade you must be putting through at least 2/3 gig a month. Now as i see it unless you're hosting warez, porn or using it as a file store then you're unlikely to do 2 gig a month as a private individual with a homespun page about the kids soccer team. Therefore the people buying these accounts are either
    a) resellers
    b) businesses
    c) individuals who know enough about the net to design and market a reasonably popular site.

    Any of those people should have the business sense to realise that unlimitted bandwidth/diskspace is absolute [email protected] (especially resellers). The reason the likes of Fasthosts in the UK are still trading is because of the greed of idiots wanting something for (virtually) nothing.

    In my experience the best hosts (for a reseller) are those who offer good service (for which you have to pay in any industry) combined with flexible tarifs taking into account differing needs which make the reseller proposition easilly scaleable.

    In respect of the legal argument - why on earth would you spend 1000's taking someone to court for your $5 back? Any sane host has very strong clauses disclaiming consequential losses so it would be a legal bunfight about a pitance. The unlimmited bunch are like the conmen in any industry that relies on a steady stream of mug punters - eventually people get wise to the scam and they'll move onto the next thing. However if you're taken in by it then should you be in business in the first place?

    Andrew

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    447

    Re: Caveat Emptor

    Originally posted by andy wood
    Caveat Emptor

  29. #29

    to astra

    Caveat Emptor - Latin which translates as "Let the buyer beware" - in frequent english language usage especially pertaining to consumer transactions - especially those which appear to offer an awful lot for very little

    Andrew

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    447
    thankies

  31. #31
    Re:

    anyways , i would never sign up for unlimited bandwidth , but i did use phpwebhosting , and un-metered is a lot more real then unlimited , plus terms like these are very easy to understand , if more hosts used this phrase , it wouldnt be so confusing , not to mention , they wouldnt be lying .



    I would like to note that we used the terms un-metered from day one because we wanted to compete with "unlimited" hosts but also not be dishonest.

    We later added more to our explanination after feedback from these forums. We will probably change it again since there are still some people with complaints about our service.

    Anyway, I thought I would say here what I said in another thread - if you don't like the way we explain our unmetered usage then please send us suggestions of what you think it should be. We will do our best to update it.

    However I think that people should realize that there will always be "unlimited" hosts. It is very hard to compete with all the "unlimited" hosts if you don't offer something similiar. There are a lot of smart people/consumers here but there are unfortunatly MANY, MANY more people who believe darn near anything they read. If you are a Host it is hard to compete if you don't offer something halfway similiar. I think we offer a very clear and truthfull explanation of our usage guidelines (I'm quite sure we NEVER use the terms unlimited).

    I would LOVE to have phpwebhosting.com be a strict pay-for-what-you-use service. Do you know how much time we spend trying to deal with people who are using WAY too much but still appear to be honest people who don't intend to abuse the service? I'm not complaining - we freely decide how we are going to market our service and it is our job to manage it all. Still, it would be great (and much more profitable) if we could just charge by usage but there are many people who could never afford it (do you really want your host to charge you by 95th percentile! However the fact is that if we want to compete we need to offer something that is at least close to the offers made by the multitude of "unlimited" hosts.

    Thanks for listening!

    Greg
    (speaking for himself and not the company as a whole!)
    phpwebhosting.com - affordable, quality hosting since 1999.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    24
    Interesting discussion.

    Really, it's all about "goog faith" though (atleast in the US). If a judge felt the hosting company wasn't acting in good faith with their offer and then their actions, they would be liable. If not, they wouldn't.

    It's true, the wording in the contract is important, but these days courts often look at the facts more than the fine print.

    Just my $.02

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    76
    In the US my dear friends... take a look at a "famous" greek webhosting company... thewebpower.com , it seems to have divisions in US also, or something like that.... At the top of the page they offer ulimited bandwidth... at the bottom they say: Unlimited is 2000MB / month which is practicaly unlimited. Oh yes! Thinking of the word unlimited... since a phone line can hold a certain number of packets according to its capacity, which is FIXED, there is no point in talking about unlimited! Because no matter how much bandwidth they wish to give you, one is for sure. Unlimited can't be!
    A website by me, for people like me, who love sales. http://www.saleslovers.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •