IP Democracy: Don't Talk Trash About the Telcos...Or Else
The phone companies are doing all they can to look like control-freaks these days. First, AT&T censored the political comments of Pearl Jam during a live webcast, then Verizon refused to sell a text message service to Naral. Both companies quickly backtracked from those decisions in the face of public outcry, but now, or so it appears, even individual customers of these companies are subject to editing, or worse, silencing...if those consumer diss the telcos themselves.
Broadband Reports notes that AT&T has a new clause in its terms of service that states AT&T will cut off your Internet service if you trash talk the company.
"AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes... tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries."
The Consumerist (via Om) says that Verizon has a comparable clause in its acceptable use policy.
3. You may NOT use the Service as follows:...(j) to damage the name or reputation of Verizon, its parent, affiliates and subsidiaries, or any third parties.
I doubt if anybody has ever been cut-off from service by either telco for violating this provision. It's also possible that this might simply be boilerplate language that lots of companies use in their customer contracts, although Comcast doesn't have this kind of language in its user agreement, nor, it seems, does Time Warner Cable.
But the mere threat of losing Internet or any other communication access if you diss your phone company is utterly ridiculous. I suggest that some smart people with AT&T and Verizon broadband accounts test the waters on this one by setting up a blog that does nothing but criticize AT&T or Verizon. Force 'em to either shut you down, which would spark a public outcry, or force them to fail to enforce this aspect of their user agreements, which could serve to undercut any legal argument they might have in the event they ever do shut down a squawky customer.
Update: John 'CZ' Czwartacki, who is kept busy these days defending Verizon, has this post on Verizon's Policy Blog that explains (sort of) the telco's prohibition against talking badly about the company. He writes:
The provision is meant to cover clearly illegal acts that would include things such as impersonating Verizon to conduct phishing scams or to sell services using our name, or the intentional spreading inaccurate information that significantly harms Verizon.
"[I]t’s obvious that we do not disconnect the service of people who criticize us or our services," C.Z. writes. That's a good clarification...it's just unnerving that the prohibition is written far more broadly than its intended meaning.
Posted by Cynthia Brumfield on October 1, 2007 11:56 AM to IP Democracy