Should prepaid carriers be allowed to advertise “no contract”?

Among the top reasons to choose a prepaid cell pone is the lack of a long-term commitment. Carriers frequently advertise this as “no contract required,” though that’s not exactly an accurate term. While customers can walk away from their service at any time without incurring additional fees, they are still bound by the terms of a contract while they use the service. You’ll see this in the carrier’s terms and conditions. But still, we see many advertisements of “no contract.” Is that fair? A Florida woman doesn’t think so. She’s suing MetroPCS for 1) not informing her of the existence of a contract, and 2) marketing their product with terms like “no contracts” and “never any contracts required.”

As the above-linked E-Commerce and Tech Law blog notes, this isn’t the first such case. A few complainants in the past have tried to stop companies from saying no contract, but have been shot down when the defendants proved that the plaintiffs viewed and accepted their terms of service. The plaintiff in this case alleges that MetroPCS never directed her towards the terms of service on its website, and has never seen it at all.

The case appears headed for trial. MetroPCS has removed the “no contract” promotion from its website, but that’s likely a temporary measure. I don’t expect the plaintiff to win in this case, but it does raise an interesting question. While it might be accepted industry jargon, using the term “no contract” certainly misleads. Unfortunately, “no long-term commitment” doesn’t sound as flashy.

Via Techdirt via dslreports.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply