T-Mobile, Verizon, and AT&T will pay a combined $10.2 million in a settlement with US states that alleged the carriers falsely advertised wireless plans as "unlimited" and phones as "free." The deal was announced yesterday by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

"A multistate investigation found that the companies made false claims in advertisements in New York and across the nation, including misrepresentations about 'unlimited' data plans that were in fact limited and had reduced quality and speed after a certain limit was reached by the user," the announcement said.

T-Mobile and Verizon agreed to pay $4.1 million each while AT&T agreed to pay a little over $2 million. The settlement includes AT&T subsidiary Cricket Wireless and Verizon subsidiary TracFone.

The settlement involves 49 of the 50 US states (Florida did not participate) and the District of Columbia. The states' investigation found that the three major carriers "made several misleading claims in their advertising, including misrepresenting 'unlimited' data plans that were actually limited, offering 'free' phones that came at a cost, and making false promises about switching to different wireless carrier plans.

Wew lad That's over $200k per state! It can even be used to cover lawyers fees and discovery costs in a case that took 9 years in court. Yuge government win here, folks!

The three carriers agreed that all advertisements to consumers must be "truthful, accurate and non-misleading." They also agreed to the following changes, the NY attorney general's office said:

• "Unlimited" mobile data plans can only be marketed if there are no limits on the quantity of data allowed during a billing cycle.

• Offers to pay for consumers to switch to a different wireless carrier must clearly disclose how much a consumer will be paid, how consumers will be paid, when consumers can expect payment, and any additional requirements consumers have to meet to get paid.

• Offers of "free" wireless devices or services must clearly state everything a consumer must do to receive the "free" devices or services.

• Offers to lease wireless devices must clearly state that the consumer will be entering into a lease agreement.

• All "savings" claims must have a reasonable basis. If a wireless carrier claims that consumers will save using its services compared to another wireless carrier, the claim must be based on similar goods or services or differences must be clearly explained to the consumer.

I bet that will learn them!

I need to rip the mask off: I need a quick peace of mind (or not) on Covid risk and apparently remedial Covid education 2024 edition

As background context, I'm Immunocompromised (3 autoimmune diseases which are mostly controlled) and only really broke my Covid bubble in February when I flew from Boston to Seattle and back to get a critical bi-lateral leg prosthetic (which is going well but challenging!).

I did not get Covid, and have branched out to do so more with that confidence with the rule of thumb to mask indoors in public, go facenaked outdoors like a feral lady. Thing is, I mostly do stuff outdoors so it's been great!

Anyway, I am considering going to a brewery in an upcoming weekend or so and was thinking about trying this as my first maskless indoor visit since beginning of Covid. I'm excited for re-entry and knowing me will spend 3 hours indoors. Yes, yes, I know I should know all this by now, but I've had stuff going on with major life changes and it's hard to follow Covid guidance change/news with anxiety about it. I got a second vax booster of the current Pfizer in April as my 6-month booster/Immuno schedule (those of us with super wonky immune systems get boosters every 6 months fyi). Anyway, does this seem like a good way to re-renter the indoor maskless?

Also, WTF is the best reference site for any of this anymore? I have a hard time with some of the estimator sites because they aren't really practical.

Also, thanks - this is scary but necessary and seems low risk and I'm scared/excited!

Look in the thread for multiple replies saying “I'm immunocompromised. I would not do this.”