Filed under: iPhone, App Store, iPod touch
AT&T says sorry
Well, that was quite an uproar. Now it seems to be over, at least for the moment. AT&T now says:"The language added on March 30 to AT&T's wireless data service Terms and Conditions was done in error. It was brought to our attention and we have since removed it. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused."
Hmmm. Now everyone can go back to being mad at Sling for dropping iPhone support for the old hardware. Ah, the power of the internet.
Have a nice weekend folks.
Thanks to our sister site Engadget for ferreting this one out.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kento Ito said 9:05PM on 4-03-2009
Horray!
Okay, everyone, grab your pitchforks, and broken iPhones that you are going to throw at, back to the Sling HQ!
Reply
josh said 9:10PM on 4-03-2009
well at least AT&T listened to the ppl on twitter and elsewhere the power of internets used for good :) plz AT&T i want real mobile tv for my iphone
Reply
Mike said 8:52AM on 4-04-2009
Error? I seriously doubt this was an "oops" moment. It became opps when it blew up in their face.
Reply
reallycrazyguy said 9:16PM on 4-03-2009
Well, given that they advertised that you could use their 2G connection to watch YouTube video when the original iPhone was released almost 2 years ago, this becomes blatantly anticompetitive if they suddenly go out of their way to say, no, you can't watch video anymore.
Of course, their TOS already explicitly states you can't watch video over their network, even though they advertised doing it...
Reply
x said 9:40PM on 4-03-2009
"The language added on March 30 to AT&T's wireless data service Terms and Conditions was done in error. It was brought to our attention and we have since removed it. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused."
I'm calling BS. Terms like this are NOT "done in error." I think it was a deliberate addition, and only got pulled because of the attention it received. If it didn't get such attention, it would still be there and nobody would be the wiser.
Reply
Rick Huizinga said 10:13PM on 4-03-2009
Yeah! I can watch YouTube again... Wait, wasn't this a wireless feature of the iPhone to begin with?!?!?!?
Reply
aldoushett said 10:20PM on 4-03-2009
The error was, getting alot of customers real mad.
Reply
Ayman said 10:36PM on 4-03-2009
Come on! I dont read many blogs online. I actually read TUAW most of the time & have it as my homepage in mobile Safari. But publishing a poorly written followup about a story mentioned in another blog without actually telling us the original story that was also written about in the other blog is basically telling us to follow Engadget & stop reading thier incomplete stories here!!
Reply
Brian said 12:24AM on 4-04-2009
what?
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/04/03/as-if-things-arent-bad-enough-atandt-terms-change-targets-slin/
Ayman said 2:21AM on 4-04-2009
oh! I didn't notice that because I clicked on the ATT tag in this post and didn't find the relevant story. Apologies.
Noah said 5:15AM on 4-04-2009
Too funny. I'm sure it was just a rogue programmer who updated the website from his home PC for kicks and giggles.
Reply
James Donevan said 10:38AM on 4-04-2009
If anyone thinks AT&T actually removed this 'new' TOS due to angry internet posts yesterday, they are indeed living in a fantasy world. Corporate policy just doesn't work that way, even amongst the most consumer responsive companies - which AT&T certainly is not.
In all likelihood this new clause was prematurely released in error. Probably intended for an internal review site but was mistakenly placed on the public site. Undoubtedly it foreshadows TOS changes slated for this summer. Notice AT&T does not deny any future intention to do this.
Reply
Dogzilla said 12:52PM on 4-04-2009
Are you on crack? What scenario can you conceive of where AT&T posted that "in error"? This is their TOS, not some hidden page on their website - it defines their relationship between the customer and their company. If you think that got changed without being vetted by about 20 different people, you are possibly the most gullible person of your generation.
I do agree that it probably wasn't in response to the internet outcry - AT&T just doesn't care that much. It was most likely done to immediately strengthen their position in the FCC investigation into their blocking Skype, and long-term to not look so much like d-bags that people jump ship as Verizon rolls out their 4G system.
But seriously...an "accident". Come on. That's a pretty stupid thing to say even for the Internet.
John.B said 1:41PM on 4-04-2009
That was quick! The outcry must've been deafening to have them reverse course on a dime like that.
Reply
bigsmashzone said 9:21AM on 4-05-2009
I can watch YouTube again...
Reply
graham barnes said 9:56AM on 4-05-2009
The trouble with some of these companies is they think they can get away with the rubbish they pull they actually think its ok to treat the consumer like that, come on AT&T wake up and smell the coffee, companies usually look at experience when you join a company yet what they did shows lack of experience. I think AT&T need to keep by their consumers afterall without them there would be no company. thank about it next time AT&T.
I understand why you did it from a network point of view but customers are paying enough allready.
Reply
Nick said 12:07PM on 4-06-2009
Yeah, man... I hate when I'm intending to type [blank space] but accidentally type [entire draconian legal clause prohibiting paying users from using key functions of their phones].
Happens to the best of us.
Reply
Philip Liu said 10:09PM on 4-06-2009
The only reason AT&T backed down was because if they unilaterally changed their contract terms, that would count as a breach of the original terms thus entitling you to terminate the contract without penalty.
Reply