[boomerbubba]

Technically it is a violation of the users contract which is a violation of civil (not criminal) law. And yes, with deep packet inspection they can tell that the ultimate destination of a data packet is not the phone (unless your doing some sort of VPN tunneling). However Sprint really wants to retain customers so they are likely only going to ban someone if there is obvious/egregious abuse. Personally I've had no problem setting up a mobile hotspot on my old Palm Pre so my daughter could download an e-book before a flight and send a few messages to friends, but I wouldn't keep a torrent running on a laptop. Somewhere between those extremes is a not publicly defined line that you shouldn't cross.

Personally, I think the line you shouldn't cross is exactly the line spelled out in your contract, which in black letters says no unauthorized tethering.

For occasional use while traveling, you can use the authorized Sprint hot spot services, which can be prorated for just a few days. You can start and stop the add-on service yourself online. The cost is quite reasonable. If you travel a lot but just need light tethering use, keeping the entry level of 2GB is only $19.99 / month.

p..s. I also disapprove of shoplifting, even if the price of the stolen items is small.

And yes, it is a civil matter. As a Sprint customer, I favor enforcement of the contracts on everyone, myself and yourself included.

[boomerbubba]

BTW, why is this thread even allowed in this forum, which supposedly has a "zero tolerance" policy regarding discussions of illegal activities including theft of service?

Perhaps that applies only to criminal matters, not civil contract violations? So is it okay here to scheme openly about how to violate the Sprint contract?

[anthonycr]

I'm pretty sure it's not illegal, it just violates your contract which means they could terminate your contract if they found out about it. However, they can't catch you because data is data, I tether my computer and visit the same places I would go on my phone and since I use desktop view in my phone browser there is absolutely no difference in the data my computer pulls down to the data my phone pulls down. You aren't costing them money by tethering.

In my opinion, charging for tethering should be illegal because it is in essence "double taxation" (okay not exactly like it but close). They are basically charging you a fee to use an app. On my provider they charge for tethering but all they do is hide the tether app in the stock launcher so anyone who installs a third party launcher (not against TOS) can access the tether function that they would otherwise pay for.

Tethering is discussed SO MUCH on these forums and its definitely not illegal. Relax already.

[boomerbubba]

I'm pretty sure it's not illegal, it just violates your contract which means they could terminate your contract if they found out about it. However, they can't catch you because data is data, I tether my computer and visit the same places I would go on my phone and since I use desktop view in my phone browser there is absolutely no difference in the data my computer pulls down to the data my phone pulls down. You aren't costing them money by tethering.

In my opinion, charging for tethering should be illegal because it is in essence "double taxation" (okay not exactly like it but close). They are basically charging you a fee to use an app. On my provider they charge for tethering but all they do is hide the tether app in the stock launcher so anyone who installs a third party launcher (not against TOS) can access the tether function that they would otherwise pay for.

Tethering is discussed SO MUCH on these forums and its definitely not illegal. Relax already.

The contract is what it is. Unauthorized tethering is clearly prohibited, and anyone who is a Sprint smartphone customer agreed to those terms. Their service is "unlimited" for a single smartphone. But not for tethering, because that could be for multiple devices or for a single PC pulling a lot more data. The only tethered data service offered by Sprint is purchased either by 1) the add-on hot spot service and app, or 2) a dedicated data plan. Both are capped at some level of GB per month.

Tethering pirates just eat up the general bandwidth on the network, slowing down service for the honest customers. I don't see why you expect the general user community here to be sympathetic. It is the rest of us you are hurting.

If you want to tether it and pay for the service, that is fine. You then have a natural incentive to use the service judiciously because you are buying chunks by the gigabyte. But no, kiddies, bandwidth isn't free.

[anthonycr]

I personally do not use a ton of data. Probably about 3 GB a month so I have no qualms about tethering because its either my phone or my computer I'm using so I'd use the same amount. Also, up until a month ago, there was no option to pay for tethering on my provider so there was no TOS about tethering. But yes, people do hog the bandwidth and that is selfish and makes everyone pay and kills bandwidth.

By the way, rooting is also against terms of service for carriers, but has been determined to be legal, so there is one example of something you can legally do that violates terms of service (illegal according by your definition) but actually legal according to law... tethering is a product of rooting so it really should fall under the rooting protection.

I look at it like this: I pay for a certain amount of data on my carrier (virgin mobile) 2.5 GB of full speed data (after that it's throttled) so I have the right to use that data as I wish.

But then agaib, if Sprint is selling unlimited data, why would they care if you used a huge amount. I know it costs them money, but if they really don't want you using a huge amount, then they should stop lying to us and change what their marketing. Yes, if everyone tethered then speeds would be slower and more data would be used, but if unlimited doesn't mean unlimited, what does it mean...

Bottom line is that charging for tethering is not right (other than to curb stress on the network) because you are simply transferring usage of the network from one device too another.

Quite obviously the Android Central staff don't think tethering is illegal because it is discussed all over the forum and they are GREAT at closing up illegal activities very quickly.

I'm sorry for sounding a little hostile
Just know it's all good.

[boomerbubba]

I personally do not use a ton of data. Probably about 3 GB a month so I have no qualms about tethering because its either my phone or my computer I'm using so I'd use the same amount. Also, up until a month ago, there was no option to pay for tethering on my provider so there was no TOS about tethering. But yes, people do hog the bandwidth and that is selfish and makes everyone pay and kills bandwidth.

By the way, rooting is also against terms of service for carriers, but has been determined to be legal, so there is one example of something you can legally do that violates terms of service (illegal according by your definition) but actually legal according to law... tethering is a product of rooting so it really should fall under the rooting protection.

I look at it like this: I pay for a certain amount of data on my carrier (virgin mobile) 2.5 GB of full speed data (after that it's throttled) so I have the right to use that data as I wish.

But then agaib, if Sprint is selling unlimited data, why would they care if you used a huge amount. I know it costs them money, but if they really don't want you using a huge amount, then they should stop lying to us and change what their marketing. Yes, if everyone tethered then speeds would be slower and more data would be used, but if unlimited doesn't mean unlimited, what does it mean...

Bottom line is that charging for tethering is not right (other than to curb stress on the network) because you are simply transferring usage of the network from one device too another.

Quite obviously the Android Central staff don't think tethering is illegal because it is discussed all over the forum and they are GREAT at closing up illegal activities very quickly.

I'm sorry for sounding a little hostile
Just know it's all good.

Did Virgin's terms not prohibit tethering? If not, then use Virgin for that purpose all you want as far as I am concerned. But here we are talking about Sprint. I have been with Sprint for a few years now, and the standared Sprint contract has always prohibited tethering AFAIK.

It is always amusing to see folks rationalize as in your "I look at it like this ..." sentence above. It doesn't matter what you wish the contract ought to say or mean. What matters is what the contract actually says. And the Sprint contract prohibits tethering:

Nature of our Service. Our rate plans, customer devices, services and features
are not for resale and are intended for reasonable and non-continuous use by a
person using a device on Sprint's networks. ...

Prohibited Network Uses. ...

Examples of prohibited data uses: Sprint data services are provided solely for purposes of web surfing, sending and receiving email, photographs and other similar messaging activities, and the non-continuous streaming of videos, downloading of files or on line gaming. Our data services may not be used: ...

(vi) for an activity that connects any device to Personal Computers (including without limitation, laptops), or other equipment for the purpose of transmitting wireless data over the network (unless customer is using a plan designated for such usage); or (vi) for any other reason that, in our sole discretion violates our policy of providing service for individual use. Unlimited Use Plans. If you subscribe to rate plans, services or features that are described as unlimited, you should be aware that such "unlimited" plans are subject to these Sprint Prohibited Network Uses.

And I don't care if you only use 3 GB per month, if you are using any of it outside the contract. When I tether, I pay for that service. Your unauthorized use still slows down service for some other user like me. And multiple pirates multiply the load and slow down the network generally for all the honest customers. I think that has been even more prevalent lately as Verizon and AT&T have moved to eliminate their unlimited smartphone plans, so more tethering pirates have migrated to Sprint.

I like Sprint's unlimited feature for my smartphone, and I want it to remain viable. Tethering abusers just threaten that in the long run. So I hope Sprint starts cracking down more strictly than they do.

If the mods don't prohibit such discussion, that's fine. It's their forum. But in my own comments, I maintain zero tolerance for tethering pirates.

[Skunkape60]

Their service is "unlimited" for a single smartphone. But not for tethering, because that could be for multiple devices or for a single PC pulling a lot more data. The only tethered data service offered by Sprint is purchased either by 1) the add-on hot spot service and app, or 2) a dedicated data plan. Both are capped at some level of GB per month.

Tethering pirates just eat up the general bandwidth on the network, slowing down service for the honest customers.

I don't tether, never have. But you comment that it uses more bandwidth is not all that accurate.

My smartphone pulls the same amount of data regardless of how many devices are tethered to it. My smartphone can only put out through Wi-Fi what it brings in. I don't care if I'm tethering to 1 computer or 5 computers. The data that is taken is only taking what my phone could take. The 1 or 5 computers have to share that.

Again my phone only throughputs so much data. Period. It makes no difference how many devices are tethered to it. It still only takes the data it normally can. Tethering only shares it as a Wi-Fi signal.

[jclee4]

I'm a bit confused now. The majority of us probably have a internet provider like Comcast or at&t that we pay for internet in our homes. The majority of us have routers that are set up to share to any electronic device. May it be a laptop, phone , tablets and so forth. If your internet provider were to come back to you and say from this point forward we will charge you for sharing the internet your paying for to other devices. I doubt you would hand your money over happily. The point is we pay for data. I should not be charged for what I do with it. For such a HUGE company Worth billions. They should have bandwidth for days if you get my point. I'm not saying its not wrong. You will have those that abuse it and others will suffer. But I never understood someone charging me extra for a feature That was built in my device and charging me extra for sharing my internet I pay for with my other devices.

[anthonycr]

For reference, Virgin Mobile is a prepaid arm of Sprint just in case anyone didn't know.

Did Virgin's terms not prohibit tethering? If not, then use Virgin for that purpose all you want as far as I am concerned. But here we are talking about Sprint. I have been with Sprint for a few years now, and the standared Sprint contract has always prohibited...............If the mods don't prohibit such discussion, that's fine. It's their forum. But in my own comments, I maintain zero tolerance for tethering pirates.

Don't be so sore about it... "Pirates" (as you are calling me) that use 3 GB of data a month do far less damage to the infrastructure and data speeds than a "Under the Contract" user that streams 5 GB of data listening to Pandora on the way to work. Yes, it is against contract, but besides being against contract, there is nothing wrong with behind the back tethering.

The reason that it is against TOS is because by making it against TOS, it forces people to buy a tethering plan, which is just stealing from the consumer by charging them for the something they already paid for. It's like someone buying groceries and then the store charging you again for them because you are wearing on the pavement as you carry them out to your car... it's a non sequitur.

You are arguing by the rules, but the rules make no sense. It makes no sense to say that I am a drain on the network tethering 3 GB of data (as we have proved it's the exact same bytes) and people using that amount solely on their phone's are not. I do not drain the network because (for prepaid) I am already at the bottom of the totem pole so I get terrible speeds.

The only thing I am doing by rooting and tethering is avoiding a ridiculous charge. If there was actually a legitimate reason to make people pay for tethering (like network stress) they would try their best to kick out those with tethering (which would be easy to do, simply by swiping a list of installed applications and seeing if third party tether apps are there). HOWEVER, they do no such thing, rather they may simply give you a hard time if you use TONS of data... but even then, there are a lot of people that use tons of data that don't get bothered.

The fact of the matter is... Tethering will pull down the same exact data. As was mentioned, the amount you can pull down is limited to your phone's processing power... Now what I would consider illegal is building a powerful wireless router/server, giving it the same ESN as your phone and tricking the network into thinking it's your phone, and pulling down huge amounts of data with your powerful system (disguised as your phone). But who has time for that

I don't know what else to say... I guess, let's keep this civil

[boomerbubba]

For reference, Virgin Mobile is a prepaid arm of Sprint just in case anyone didn't know.



Don't be so sore about it... "Pirates" (as you are calling me) that use 3 GB of data a month do far less damage to the infrastructure and data speeds than a "Under the Contract" user that streams 5 GB of data listening to Pandora on the way to work. Yes, it is against contract, but besides being against contract, there is nothing wrong with behind the back tethering.

The reason that it is against TOS is because by making it against TOS, it forces people to buy a tethering plan, which is just stealing from the consumer by charging them for the something they already paid for. It's like someone buying groceries and then the store charging you again for them because you are wearing on the pavement as you carry them out to your car... it's a non sequitur.

You are arguing by the rules, but the rules make no sense. It makes no sense to say that I am a drain on the network tethering 3 GB of data (as we have proved it's the exact same bytes) and people using that amount solely on their phone's are not. I do not drain the network because (for prepaid) I am already at the bottom of the totem pole so I get terrible speeds.

The only thing I am doing by rooting and tethering is avoiding a ridiculous charge. If there was actually a legitimate reason to make people pay for tethering (like network stress) they would try their best to kick out those with tethering (which would be easy to do, simply by swiping a list of installed applications and seeing if third party tether apps are there). HOWEVER, they do no such thing, rather they may simply give you a hard time if you use TONS of data... but even then, there are a lot of people that use tons of data that don't get bothered.

The fact of the matter is... Tethering will pull down the same exact data. As was mentioned, the amount you can pull down is limited to your phone's processing power... Now what I would consider illegal is building a powerful wireless router/server, giving it the same ESN as your phone and tricking the network into thinking it's your phone, and pulling down huge amounts of data with your powerful system (disguised as your phone). But who has time for that

I don't know what else to say... I guess, let's keep this civil

Yes, I know that Virgin is Sprint's prepaid arm. I haven't read their terms of service, but if they included unlimited data service then I'll bet they also prohibited tethering all along. In any case, we are discussing Sprint's contract, which unambiguously prohibits unauthorized tethering and expressly excludes it from the "unlimited" phone service. If you use Sprint today, you agreed to that contract.

Your comment is just another amusing but unpersuasive rationalization for violating the contract. Again you describe what you think the contract ought to say. But that is not the contract you agreed to. Restating your rationalization changes nothing.

In general, tethering does add to bandwidth a lot more than handheld phones. People in general will stream Netflix for hours to a tethered laptop, but not so much to a phone. And I know my PC-based surfing is many times more intense than my phone-based surfing. So Sprint offers a service with unlimited usage for a single smartphone, based upon a reasonable estimate of what most users will tend to use with that handheld medium alone. That is the service, and the only service, that you bought when you agreed to the contract.

Sprint also offers tethered services, priced with capped data increments, for an additional charge. Those who tether without paying for those services are pirating. This is not just a matter of you versus the big, bad corporation. Pirates are robbing the community of honest Sprint users of bandwidth for the services we do pay for. When I need tethering, I pay for it. (I wish it were free, too, but wishes don't matter.)

And I am being entirely civil. :-)

[jonathanm1978]

First off, your definition of a pirate, and what a pirate actually is differ TOTALLY. You are calling people who use something they've already paid for, a pirate...which tells me you have no clue what the word 'pirate' or the act of piracy refers to..because there is no similarity.

• Block, degrade, or interfere with the ability of end users to download and utilize applications of their choosing on the licensee’s Block C network, subject to reasonable network management. Wireless service providers subject to this requirement will not be allowed to disable features or functionality in handsets where such action is not related to reasonable network management and protection, or compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. For example, providers may not “lock” handsets to prevent their transfer from one system to another.
• Block Wi-Fi access, MP3 playback ringtone capability, or other services that compete with wireless service providers’ own offerings.
• Exclude applications or devices solely on the basis that such applications or devices would unreasonably increase bandwidth demands.
• Impose any additional discriminatory charges (one-time or recurring) or conditions on customers who seek to use devices or applications outside of those provided by the licensee.
• Deny access to a customer’s device solely because that device makes use of other wireless spectrum bands, such as cellular or PCS spectrum.

(1) the FCC has specifically said that large increases in bandwidth demand are not a harm to a network, (2) VZW permits tethering if you do it with their app that you must pay extra to use (per GB of usage), and (3) the harm referenced is traditionally thought of as things that cause interference with a network, not things that use a lot of it.

Moreover, the FCC specifically affirmatively grants the carrier the option to throttle or meter usage to manage their network.

This would apply to any carrier. Just because it's in the ToS doesn't mean it's illegal ..and it damn sure doesn't mean that people who do it are "pirates"...

I don't even use tethering, but I know how and what concerning it..and actually, to be definitive, you're calling people who bring us open-sourced phone operating systems, pirates by your definition. The carrier figured out a way to double-charge for the data, but open-sourced OS with root privileges allows it.

Call the Sprint store nearest you and tell them your phone is rooted. They don't care. I actually told a Sprint store representative that a week ago..and he told me "I perfectly understand why you did it..after I explained my Optimus quit working after the update last October and the only way to fix it was to root and custom-ROM it.
Still, I didn't need to tether/hotspot, but I still can't leave my two cents out..since I've been into piracy in the past and know what it is...seeing someone call people a pirate for such as this...it is a blanket statement that's made in ignorance to the facts.
And please, quit with the ToS crap...the same ToS says that if you roam too much, even if your pay your bill on time and have been a customer for 10 years, they can boot you and cut you off without any qualms about it..so the ToS is there to benefit THEM, the CARRIER...not to enact any legal rights they may have.

*People have this common misconception that heavy data use constitutes harm on their network...when the FCC has already stated that more "use" of the network doesn't constitute harm or damage. The person watching Netflix in 1080 on their phone uses the same data as a person watching Netflix in 1080 on their laptop. The same cluster of data is downloaded, no matter what the source is, the 1080p file doesn't automagically get smaller because Netflix somehow can see you're on a phone and they want to help carriers save on bandwidth.

And bandwidth costing money..that's a laugh too. Bandwidth doesn't hardly cost a carrier ANYTHING.

[boomerbubba]

I don't tether, never have. But you comment that it uses more bandwidth is not all that accurate.

My smartphone pulls the same amount of data regardless of how many devices are tethered to it. My smartphone can only put out through Wi-Fi what it brings in. I don't care if I'm tethering to 1 computer or 5 computers. The data that is taken is only taking what my phone could take. The 1 or 5 computers have to share that.

Again my phone only throughputs so much data. Period. It makes no difference how many devices are tethered to it. It still only takes the data it normally can. Tethering only shares it as a Wi-Fi signal.

You miss the point. It is not just about device throughput. The biggest governor on total throughput is the user, not the device. PC users -- on average -- can and do pull lots more data down than smartphone users do. I will not tolerate watching a movie on my small handheld screen very often, and that is usually because I am trapped somewhere like a bus or an airport. But I will watch movies on a laptop more frequently, and it is much easier to take the laptop video from Netflix and throw it onto a big screen. Ditto with browsing and surfing in general. PC users are much more robust in their browsing than phone users are.

Overall, on average, one user on a single smartphone for one hour has a much smaller data footprint than one PC user using broadband, let alone multiple users. And outside of web browsers and streaming media, most smartphone apps are really not very network-data-intensive. So a typical, single smartphone user is not likely to burn lots of data per hour. And when multiple users are connected to a WiFi hub, the throughput can go up hugely because their total shared throughput can start to approach the actual device and network limits.

Golden Corral's all-you-can eat business model is based on the average consumption of the customers, because there are practical human limits on how much will be consumed while the customer is seated there. But the restaurant does not allow one customer to bring a shopping bag and load it up with take-out food for the same price. They do sell to-go meals, but it is bulk priced per pound.

Similarly, Sprint is still offering "unlimited" data service for a single smartphone used by a single user. But tethering services are not priced under that umbrella. Tethered services are not priced per device, but per GB,

[Skunkape60]

You miss the point. It is not just about device throughput. The biggest governor on total throughput is the user, not the device. PC users -- on average -- can and do pull lots more data down than smartphone users do. I will not tolerate watching a movie on my small handheld screen very often, and that is usually because I am trapped somewhere like a bus or an airport. But I will watch movies on a laptop more frequently, and it is much easier to take the laptop video from Netflix and throw it onto a big screen. Ditto with browsing and surfing in general. PC users are much more robust in their browsing than phone users are.

Overall, on average, one user on a single smartphone for one hour has a much smaller data footprint than one PC user using broadband, let alone multiple users. And outside of web browsers and streaming media, most smartphone apps are really not very network-data-intensive. So a typical, single smartphone user is not likely to burn lots of data per hour. And when multiple users are connected to a WiFi hub, the throughput can go up hugely because their total shared throughput can start to approach the actual device and network limits.

Golden Corral's all-you-can eat business model is based on the average consumption of the customers, because there are practical human limits on how much will be consumed while the customer is seated there. But the restaurant does not allow one customer to bring a shopping bag and load it up with take-out food for the same price. They do sell to-go meals, but it is bulk priced per pound.

Similarly, Sprint is still offering "unlimited" data service for a single smartphone used by a single user. But tethering services are not priced under that umbrella. Tethered services are not priced per device, but per GB,

Lol... I guarantee that I use more data on my phone in a month than I ever do on my desktop. I do everything on my phone. I may turn on my desktop perhaps 4 hours a month.

[boomerbubba]

Lol... I guarantee that I use more data on my phone in a month than I ever do on my desktop. I do everything on my phone. I may turn on my desktop perhaps 4 hours a month.

Then you are not much of a candidate for tethering. Some other people are, and it is the aggregate data throughput that matters. In the mix there also are people who run multiuser, household Internet off tethered "unlimited" Sprint phones to avoid paying a broadband bill at all.

Especially now that the biggest carriers are dropping their unlimited phone plans, the high-volume tetherers are incented to move to Sprint. (Note that tethering is very much allowed, even encouraged, under the new data plans at AT&T and Verizon -- because the overall plans are priced by increments of GB.) So the big carriers can skim the high-dollar, low-cost accounts, and the highest cost, low-dollar accounts come to Sprint. The user base suffers with slower network speeds. In order to keep Sprint's unlimited smartphone model viable for most of us, it is more important than ever to curb abuses.

[Skunkape60]

like i said in my first post, I don't tether.

[jonathanm1978]

I'd like to find a user (out of Members: 901,701, Active Members: 243,505 here on Android Central) that uses tethering as their primary means of internet in their entire home...I personally have never seen anyone say they do this, and I find it hard to believe this could be feasible, or viable.

The main problem with insinuating/assuming this is that the ping time is nearly 1 second, which is nearly as bad as satellite internet.
More devices using a tethered connection, slower it gets..and less data gets through without errors...someone might try using it on one computer -- tablet -- laptop..but for a long-term solution to internet needs...no, I doubt it. Seems more likely that you're just saying that to make your argument sound better against people who tether.

You really should be arguing against developers who do the rooting, not the people who use the functionality that comes AFTER rooting. Your entire argument is against people using open-source OS..fully open-sourced. Tethering is part of ANDROID, not something Sprint, VZW, AT&T and T-mo invented...tethering was around for AGES before the providers decided they could use that to charge people a second time around for something they've paid for already.

I can show C&P from my AT&T DSL bill from months that I don't do PS3 gaming and only do surfing the net where I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month. That is inclusive of my cell phone being connected to Wifi, and the Airvana that gives me Sprint service.

I pay for the internet that provides the data that's broadcasted via my Airave (3G data speeds)..does that mean that since I already pay for it through AT&T that I shouldn't be charged for data on Sprint???
I'd really like for this guy to answer this one for me...I'd like to know his answer.
If I turn off WIFI and use ONLY 3G in my home, in range of the AIRAVE...that AIRAVE is plugged into my DSL (or actually, it's plugged into my Buffalo High-Power router)...so the internet connected is provided..and the Airave just broadcasts the data that it's provided via my DSL connection.
How can Sprint charge me a data fee if I never leave home and only use the Airave for my phone to connect to??? I'm not even on Sprint's tower...I'm on a femtocell tower..and that particular data is already paid for via my AT&T bill...
So please, enlighten me on that...how can Sprint do that when I never hit their tower (assuming I stay home from the 6th of this month until the 5th of next month)...??

Again, it's a bandwidth issue, and bandwidth doesn't cost the carriers (or AT&T, or Comcast, or any other ISP) hardly ANYTHING. Bandwidth is almost GIVEN away...

[boomerbubba]

I'd like to find a user (out of Members: 901,701, Active Members: 243,505 here on Android Central) that uses tethering as their primary means of internet in their entire home...I personally have never seen anyone say they do this, and I find it hard to believe this could be feasible, or viable.

The main problem with insinuating/assuming this is that the ping time is nearly 1 second, which is nearly as bad as satellite internet

I have known of college kids in group houses who try this. Not a very satisfactory solution, but they think of it as "free." I have known adults who tether rooted while traveling. And I have seen several user comments in other forums and threads focusing on Sprint's new network under construction -- with ping times closer to 100 ms -- who think this will be viable for them for home Internet. I think they will be disappointed, mainly because I predict that Sprint will crack down more.

You really should be arguing against developers who do the rooting, not the people who use the functionality that comes AFTER rooting. Your entire argument is against people using open-source OS..fully open-sourced. Tethering is part of ANDROID, not something Sprint, VZW, AT&T and T-mo invented...tethering was around for AGES before the providers decided they could use that to charge people a second time around for something they've paid for already.

Well, Android is not that much good on an unconnected phone, and Google does not run the carriers. They have their own business models whether we like it or not. I'm not at all crazy about the structure of the U.S. telecom industry myself, but I am bound by the contracts I agree to.

No, I have no argument against rooting. I don't do it now, but someday I might. I do have a big problem with people who root their expensive smartphones and brick them, then commit insurance fraud to get free or subsidized replacements. That inflates the premiums for everyone else.

I can show C&P from my AT&T DSL bill from months that I don't do PS3 gaming and only do surfing the net where I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month. That is inclusive of my cell phone being connected to Wifi, and the Airvana that gives me Sprint service.

I pay for the internet that provides the data that's broadcasted via my Airave (3G data speeds)..does that mean that since I already pay for it through AT&T that I shouldn't be charged for data on Sprint???
I'd really like for this guy to answer this one for me...I'd like to know his answer.
If I turn off WIFI and use ONLY 3G in my home, in range of the AIRAVE...that AIRAVE is plugged into my DSL (or actually, it's plugged into my Buffalo High-Power router)...so the internet connected is provided..and the Airave just broadcasts the data that it's provided via my DSL connection.
How can Sprint charge me a data fee if I never leave home and only use the Airave for my phone to connect to??? I'm not even on Sprint's tower...I'm on a femtocell tower..and that particular data is already paid for via my AT&T bill...
So please, enlighten me on that...how can Sprint do that when I never hit their tower (assuming I stay home from the 6th of this month until the 5th of next month)...??

Wow. I don;t know quite what to make of that ramble, or how to respond. I am not Sprint. But I can't think of why anyone with an Airave at home would ever want to tether there at all. They would be much better off just using WiFi. And when you say "I don't use but 4 to 5 gigs per month" surfing on your DSL service, you should understand that would have a market value with a Sprint data plan of about $50-$60/month depending on the plan. So if you did use your "unlimited" phone to pirate-tether that amount of data, you would be cheating by about that amount in dollar terms.

Again, it's a bandwidth issue, and bandwidth doesn't cost the carriers (or AT&T, or Comcast, or any other ISP) hardly ANYTHING. Bandwidth is almost GIVEN away..

It is absolutely a bandwidth issue. But bandwidth is anything but free. In fact, bandwidth right now is very scarce. That is why our 3G speeds are so slow. Demand overwhelmingly exceeds Sprint network capacity, and it is no secret that speeds have been getting worse.

That will improve with the Network Vision rebuild. But the new bandwidth will not be free by a longshot. In fact Sprint, a company that now loses money, is deeply in debt to finance the new network. Whatever the new capacity is, I want it to be 100 percent available to support honest paying customers like myself, not pirates.

[jonathanm1978]

So you're saying the chart I just posted was designed by my 5 year old? Damn, can't you look at a graph and read it? Wait, let me guess, bandwidth for cellular costs more than bandwidth for home broadband, right? Because it's a different internet or something? Funny. Like I just showed, bandwidth is cheap and barely costs anything for them. Believe it or don't, don't care. And not understanding about the airave just shows that you don't get I what's being said. I just gave proof that broadband bandwidth is dirt cheap and accounts for VERY LITTLE of the bill we pay, but I guess that is not relevant here as well.
And again, I don't tether, or "pirate" as you have so named it.

If you did understand, you would know that bandwidth and capacity are TOTALLY SEPARATE AND HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER. Capacity is what causes network lag, not lack of bandwidth. The speed would be great if Sprint had the equipment in place to access it.

Swype'd with my Sammy Galaxy S3

[boomerbubba]

So you're saying the chart I just posted was designed by my 5 year old? Damn, can't you look at a graph and read it?

I didn't comment on that chart because I have no idea where it came from, who created it or what its context is. All I can tell from the labels is that is seems to describe some metric about cable-based internet, which has nothing to do with wireless.

The capacity metric that we care most about at any instant because it affects speed is some metric of bits per second downloaded or uploaded. When carriers charge for data, they typically charge by cumulative bytes transmitted over some longer period of time, such as a month. As multiple users share the name network channel at any given moment, that data movement will be fast or slow as a function of the bits queued to transmit through the bps capacity of the network. So that is how the two are related. That instantaneous capacity is a function of bandwidth. And bandwidth is usually quoted as some variant of bits per second. The capacity for wireless can only be as fast as its slowest bottleneck. In wireless data, that bottleneck might be in the RF channels, in the backhaul (historically copper landlines, now being replaced by fiber and microwave), in the carrier's core system or switching network, or in the Internet backbone. None of that infrastructure is free. Sprint is spending billions right now to rebuild its entire network.

I have no idea how the metric behind your cable Internet chart was calculated, nor how it is relevant here. The dollar prices for GB per month I am quoting are those charged by Sprint, a wireless carrier, to its retail customers. Data rates in terms of dollars per gigabyte per month are comparable for other wireless carriers.

(Your chart does not even make sense to me as far as describing cable Internet or DSL goes. It is captioned "Consumer pricing of Internet bandwidth per gigabyte" -- even though bandwidth is not usually quoted as cumulative data bytes transmitted, but as the bps rate of transmission. For example, the charted figure for AT&T's DSL service is $0.13. You say you used 4-5 GB per month with AT&T as your ISP. So your monthly Internet bill for that period from AT&T was only about $0.52 to $0.65? I don't think so.)

[jonathanm1978]

dude, you just don't fking get it.

I live next door to the DSLAM that provides me AT&T DSL.
NEXT DOOR.

The AT&T cell tower that's a mile away from my house, has a fiber line that runs FROM THIS DSLAM

That means that the internet/data is provided by the SAME DSLAM AND HUT THAT GIVES ME DSL.
DO YOU COMPREHEND? AT&T GIVES ME DSL...AT&T POWERS THE CELL TOWER 1 MILE AWAY WITH THE SAME FKING FIBER THAT FEEDS THIS HUT/DSLAM. COMPRENDE?
JESUS.

Let me guess..the internet that goes up to the tower is a different internet than what is sent to me, FROM THE SAME HUT AND SAME DSLAM?
And thanks for clearing it up that AT&T is cable..(ie, the chart).
At least try to understand...

[boomerbubba]

dude, you just don't fking get it.

I live next door to the DSLAM that provides me AT&T DSL.
NEXT DOOR.

The AT&T cell tower that's a mile away from my house, has a fiber line that runs FROM THIS DSLAM

That means that the internet/data is provided by the SAME DSLAM AND HUT THAT GIVES ME DSL.
DO YOU COMPREHEND? AT&T GIVES ME DSL...AT&T POWERS THE CELL TOWER 1 MILE AWAY WITH THE SAME FKING FIBER THAT FEEDS THIS HUT/DSLAM. COMPRENDE?
JESUS.

Let me guess..the internet that goes up to the tower is a different internet than what is sent to me, FROM THE SAME HUT AND SAME DSLAM?
And thanks for clearing it up that AT&T is cable..(ie, the chart).
At least try to understand...

What does any that have to do with the chart you posted, or with your attempt to make it prove that end-to-end wireless bandwidth is almost free? Is your AT&T ISP bill really $0.52-$0.65 per month as your chart would indicate? Are you an AT&T phone customer, too? Do they charge $0.13 per GB for wireless data because they get it from the Free Data Fairy? I would jump on that deal if I were you, if AT&T really does run its wireless service on its as you assume.

I don't believe such a deal is really available, though. And I don't think your incoherent ramblings have anything to do with the subject of tethering piracy on Sprint wireless. Your argument now is: AT&T has fiber backhaul available, therefore it is acceptable for Sprint subscribers to pirate tethered wireless service. That is called a non sequitur. You are just wrong at the top of your voice. The all-caps certainly make it all true, though.

[boomerbubba]

Duplicate post.

[jonathanm1978]

Don't care what you believe or don't believe. If I were so inclined, I could give you the phone number of the guy who helped dig the line under my driveway (yeah, that fiber optic 24-pair line that feeds the cell phone tower) and you could discuss your disbelief with him..
You can't believe that someone who actually KNOWS how this works has chimed in and you call the facts "incoherent" and "ramblings"...
truly shows the ignorance involved here...believe what you want..believe that the carriers are facing a shortage of bandwidth, and they build factories that produce 1-gallon buckets of bandwidth.....I really don't give two sh*ts what you think about where they get their bandwidth. I know for a fact that AT&T's cell tower is fed by AT&T's fiber line, which means they provide their own bandwidth.

Your ignorance really shines when you ask about me paying the same amount in the chart for my DSL...did you really just ask me if I paid the same price for bandwidth as what it COSTS the carrier/ISP?? Oh. My. God.

Really...please stop making yourself look more foolish.
You just can't deal with being faced with the facts and would rather believe that cell phone carriers pay out the *** for data that we use, when they do NOT...

This reminds me of people who used to argue that text messages cost something for the carriers, when it finally came out that actually text messages were free for them, and they were making a KILLING on texts by charging people on a per-use basis for them.

[boomerbubba]

Don't care what you believe or don't believe. If I were so inclined, I could give you the phone number of the guy who helped dig the line under my driveway (yeah, that fiber optic 24-pair line that feeds the cell phone tower) and you could discuss your disbelief with him..
You can't believe that someone who actually KNOWS how this works has chimed in and you call the facts "incoherent" and "ramblings"...
truly shows the ignorance involved here...believe what you want..believe that the carriers are facing a shortage of bandwidth, and they build factories that produce 1-gallon buckets of bandwidth.....I really don't give two sh*ts what you think about where they get their bandwidth. I know for a fact that AT&T's cell tower is fed by AT&T's fiber line, which means they provide their own bandwidth.

Your ignorance really shines when you ask about me paying the same amount in the chart for my DSL...did you really just ask me if I paid the same price for bandwidth as what it COSTS the carrier/ISP?? Oh. My. God.

Really...please stop making yourself look more foolish.
You just can't deal with being faced with the facts and would rather believe that cell phone carriers pay out the *** for data that we use, when they do NOT...

This reminds me of people who used to argue that text messages cost something for the carriers, when it finally came out that actually text messages were free for them, and they were making a KILLING on texts by charging people on a per-use basis for them.

Okay, lets agree to disagree. You keep right on believing your cut-and-paste chart from the unknown source -- which did not say "carrier cost" BTW, but "Consumer pricing". And of course, the best high-level technical and financial analysis always comes from the guy who digs the ditch at your house. All-caps makes anything true on the Internet.

[jonathanm1978]

Hah..the guy who digs the ditch? So, from "helped dig the line" you gathered he was a ditch-digger?
Obviously, I didn't mean the guy who ran the ditch witch...fking Christ guy.
I have connections with deployment engineers and project leads for AT&T who I get my info from...
where does YOUR info come from? Google?
You're funny, assuming that I would ask the guy to cut off his tractor to answer questions about fiber optic lines...


I've never seen anyone get so hostile when someone shows them they are wrong, it's amusingly funny when presented with factual statements that you have nothing else to rely on by saying it's "ramblings and incoherent"...

You get an "A" for effort though..at least you're trying by pretending to know something.