Comments on: Memo to U.S. Cellular http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/ Politische Kommentare mit Snarkenremarken Mon, 14 May 2012 18:16:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Not Exactly Rocket Science http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10625 Not Exactly Rocket Science Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:17:03 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10625 <strong>That link fest I promised you earlier</strong> Today's theme: Rats of all sorts.... That link fest I promised you earlier
Today’s theme: Rats of all sorts….

]]> By: Marcus http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10598 Marcus Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:40:49 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10598 Well, it is spelled artitumIs but that is no big deal. The link works and I have a new blog to look over! Lets see what I think about you. :mrgreen: Well, it is spelled artitumIs but that is no big deal. The link works and I have a new blog to look over! Lets see what I think about you. :mrgreen:

]]> By: Xrlq http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10595 Xrlq Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:35:47 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10595 WT & Patterico: D'oh! The links have been fixed. As to the substantive question, thus far they haven't successfully stolen anything. They are currently attempting to steal $150, which they call a "termination" fee, for a service Spoons didn't terminate, relying instead on a deliberately vague concept of "inactive" that is neither material to the contract nor adequately defined. Their legitimate interest under the original contract is to be paid, not to prevent him from using anyone else's services at the same time, and certainly not to prevent him from porting his number to another provider (bear in mind that number portability did not exist in 2002, was not expected anytime soon, and almost certainly was not addressed in the contract). And to top it all off, they're charging this "fee" under circumstances where it clearly amounts to an unlawful penalty, not a reasonable estimate of liquidated damages. If Spoons had tried to get out of his contract, their damages would have been the amount left on the contract, not $150. Since he didn't try to get out of anything, their damages are zero, unless you count the damages to their reputation that their assholery is certain to cause. WT & Patterico: D’oh! The links have been fixed. As to the substantive question, thus far they haven’t successfully stolen anything. They are currently attempting to steal $150, which they call a “termination” fee, for a service Spoons didn’t terminate, relying instead on a deliberately vague concept of “inactive” that is neither material to the contract nor adequately defined. Their legitimate interest under the original contract is to be paid, not to prevent him from using anyone else’s services at the same time, and certainly not to prevent him from porting his number to another provider (bear in mind that number portability did not exist in 2002, was not expected anytime soon, and almost certainly was not addressed in the contract). And to top it all off, they’re charging this “fee” under circumstances where it clearly amounts to an unlawful penalty, not a reasonable estimate of liquidated damages. If Spoons had tried to get out of his contract, their damages would have been the amount left on the contract, not $150. Since he didn’t try to get out of anything, their damages are zero, unless you count the damages to their reputation that their assholery is certain to cause.

]]> By: Murdoc Online http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10594 Murdoc Online Sun, 19 Dec 2004 17:13:56 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10594 <strong>US Cellular problems at Spoons</strong> Need your help/opinion re: commercial dispute Spoons is having trouble with an early termination fee at US Cellular. Though it sounds from his telling that he's certainly fulfilled the spirit of the contract, I'm not so sure about the letter.... US Cellular problems at Spoons
Need your help/opinion re: commercial dispute Spoons is having trouble with an early termination fee at US Cellular. Though it sounds from his telling that he’s certainly fulfilled the spirit of the contract, I’m not so sure about the letter….

]]> By: Patterico http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10593 Patterico Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:30:09 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10593 Actually, it's a fair question -- having followed my smart-ass advice and learned that the link is not what I thought it was. Sorry for the misplaced sarcasm. Try this: http://www.thespoonsexperience.com/archives/003441.php#003441 Actually, it’s a fair question — having followed my smart-ass advice and learned that the link is not what I thought it was. Sorry for the misplaced sarcasm.

Try this:

http://www.thespoonsexperience.com/archives/003441.php#003441

]]> By: Patterico http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10591 Patterico Sun, 19 Dec 2004 16:17:44 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10591 Click on the link. That's how these here blogs work. Click on the link. That’s how these here blogs work.

]]> By: William Teach http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/memo-to-us-cellular/comment-page-1/#comment-10589 William Teach Sun, 19 Dec 2004 14:41:34 +0000 http://xrlq.com/2004/12/18/2079/memo-to-us-cellular/#comment-10589 Should we ask what they stole? Should we ask what they stole?

]]>