Torrents on unlimited internet from Yota
-
Is Yota required to provide anlim without user speed limits for torrents?
Yes [ 4735 ] ** [81,91%]
Not [ 1046 ] ** [18,09%]
Total votes: 5781
 



Rep: (299)
Unlimited Internet torrents fromYota


Attached Image

Topic holivara on the topic of "obliged or not obliged." Periodic stuffing for bored trolls guaranteed.
I warned
Attached Image

old hat
It is no secret that since September 2014, Yota in its tariff plans provides unlimited Internet at unlimited speeds. The exceptions are as follows: you cannot use torrents, you cannot share the Internet to other devices with a speed higher than 1 Mb / s.
Naturally, searches began in Runet, how to get around these restrictions. Ways found and actively discussed (seehere). At the same time, there are complaints about the (allegedly) decline in Internet speed indicators.

It is logical to assume that with the growth of the subscriber base (which, mostly, is part of the guy's highly advanced in IT technologies), which was expensive to Anliam for 350 rubles (the price for Moscow) and which shares this Internet on everything that is not moving - Yota's channels began to shook slowly. Perhaps, at the stage of preparing for launch, technological errors and stations are not able to cope with the abrupt traffic. And perhaps the methods of protection against "especially gifted personalities" were not worked out enough. The result is deplorable: speed fell.

Actually, what the dispute ... Runet divided into two warring camps. One argues that "once paid and stated - please remove and put." The second is of the opinion that "mobile Internet for mobile devices. If it is used for its intended purpose, it will be good for everyone."

I - for the second option. And you?

Posted on 10/13/2014, 15:18:

Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 3:27 pm*
Well, if there were not hundreds of clever men who are sorry for 300 rubles on the wired Internet and that launch torrents on Yota, we’ll have enough speed for YouTube now.

Perch @ 10/13/2014, 15:42*
I do not agree ... I have an Internet home from home and at the highest speed ... but I am not always the same at home ... and often I need to get a series or an audiobook right on my smart ...

not always, it is important for me to have this opportunity just in case, as a reserve, when the main cable provider fixes the problems

Well, this is a special case. We both understand that 95% of those present are experiencing so clearly not for the backup channel.
Here, by the way, is a bright representative of the "first" camp:
Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 3:27 pm*
We’ll have enough speed for YouTube now.

Everyone has the right to use his Internet as he wants.

Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 15:55*
Spit on the rest. Well, yes, who would argue.

Useroldyoung_menofficially recognized by the troll of the topic.
Attached Image

old hat
Unlimited Internet torrents fromYota
Discussion of the mobile operator Yota пїЅ | Tethering restrictions bypassYota пїЅ | Bypass restrictions p2p traffic Yota пїЅ | Torrents on unlimited internet from Yota пїЅ | VPN, private virtual networks: purchase, configuration, exchange of experience пїЅ
Attached Image

Topic holivara on the topic of "obliged or not obliged." Periodic stuffing for bored trolls guaranteed.
I warned
Attached Image

old hat
It is no secret that since September 2014, Yota in its tariff plans provides unlimited Internet at unlimited speeds. The exceptions are as follows: you cannot use torrents, you cannot share the Internet to other devices with a speed higher than 1 Mb / s.
Naturally, searches began in Runet, how to get around these restrictions. Ways found and actively discussed (seehere). At the same time, there are complaints about the (allegedly) decline in Internet speed indicators.

It is logical to assume that with the growth of the subscriber base (which, mostly, is part of the guy's highly advanced in IT technologies), which was expensive to Anliam for 350 rubles (the price for Moscow) and which shares this Internet on everything that is not moving - Yota's channels began to shook slowly. Perhaps, at the stage of preparing for launch, technological errors and stations are not able to cope with the abrupt traffic. And perhaps the methods of protection against "especially gifted personalities" were not worked out enough. The result is deplorable: speed fell.

Actually, what the dispute ... Runet divided into two warring camps. One argues that "once paid and stated - please remove and put." The second is of the opinion that "mobile Internet for mobile devices. If it is used for its intended purpose, it will be good for everyone."

I - for the second option. And you?

Posted on 10/13/2014, 15:18:

Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 3:27 pm*
Well, if there were not hundreds of clever men who are sorry for 300 rubles on the wired Internet and that launch torrents on Yota, we’ll have enough speed for YouTube now.

Perch @ 10/13/2014, 15:42*
I do not agree ... I have an Internet home from home and at the highest speed ... but I am not always the same at home ... and often I need to get a series or an audiobook right on my smart ...

not always, it is important for me to have this opportunity just in case, as a reserve, when the main cable provider fixes the problems

Well, this is a special case. We both understand that 95% of those present are experiencing so clearly not for the backup channel.
Here, by the way, is a bright representative of the "first" camp:
Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 3:27 pm*
We’ll have enough speed for YouTube now.

Everyone has the right to use his Internet as he wants.

Frost_Imp @ 10/13/2014, 15:55*
Spit on the rest. Well, yes, who would argue.

Useroldyoung_menofficially recognized by the troll of the topic.
Attached Image


Post has been editedВ®udzinsky в„ў - 09.09.18, 12:38
Reason for editing: refreshed cap



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 13:53*
- Do you really think that the absence of a torrent client is a lack of coders ?.

How difficult with you. Eh, YouTube on Windows is missing, apparently Microsoft, according to your logic, considers the plugin illegal.



Rep: (299)
YouTube on Windows is missing, apparently Microsoft, according to your logic, considers the plugin illegal.

By my logic, I’m talking about Apple, listing platforms I don’t understand, is not in my plans.



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 13:53*
...
And you cringe again. Above, I wrote a comparison for the package "all inclusive". If you wish to UNLIMITED to eat chicken, compote and cheap sweets - buy all inclusive to Turkey for X rubles. If you want to eat lobsters, truffles and HenessyXO UNLIMITED, buy all inclusive Emirates for X * 100 rubles. In both sentences, I highlighted the word UNLIMITED.

So the link to the law will be? Where it is forbidden to use the mobile Internet via Wi-Fi or something else, for PC.
Just your conclusions, which you put as an absolute truth, do not convince me, in any way.

Posted on 10/24/2014 13:05:

Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 14:00*
...
By my logic, I’m talking about Apple, listing platforms I don’t understand, is not in my plans.

: D Apple is just one of many. Off clients of torrents are on others, Google android, Microsoft.
With apple, there is a question that torrent clients are not created off-site by developers, but from third-party ... this is not "illegal" as you wrote, just apple disclaims responsibility, possibly a guarantee, for the use of off-software. But the crime in the use of third-party prog is definitely not.



Rep: (299)
So the link to the law will be? Where it is forbidden to use the mobile Internet via Wi-Fi or something else, for PC.
Just your conclusions, which you put as an absolute truth, do not convince me, in any way.

And here is the law? The provider provides you a service. To the extent and at the price that it considers necessary. If the provider is ready to provide you with an unlimited channel without torrents - this is his right.
And you, as a user who is allegedly infringed upon the rights, already have to prove what the provider is obligated to you and what is not.

Posted on 10/24/2014 13:09:

Actually, the survey is something ...
Is Yota required ...
You insist - that is obliged. Well, so bring it under the legislative framework. How deftly the arrows have moved me ...



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 14:07*
...
And here is the law? The provider provides you a service. To the extent and at the price that it considers necessary. If the provider is ready to provide you with an unlimited channel without torrents - this is his right.
And you, as a user who is allegedly infringed upon the rights, already have to prove what the provider is obligated to you and what is not.

Evo as turned: D I remind you that you play the role of the victim.
Law! This is what exactly you can use when your rights are violated. But this is not the case. In this situation, it is not exactly you who are satisfied that there is a category of citizens who use the mobile Internet differently than you.
Users on torrents are satisfied with everything, the provider MUST provide access to the Internet, for timely payment ... everything happens, but how and where users used the Internet without breaking the law is a personal matter of users. Only they have the right to do so. Your conclusions, funny allegories with all-inclusive, etc., do not have other moral claims besides.

Post has been editedruslanbag43 - 24.10.14, 13:19



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 14:09*

Actually, the survey is something ...
Is Yota required ...
You insist - that is obliged. Well, so bring it under the legislative framework. How deftly the arrows have moved me ...

There is nothing to fail. YOTA is obliged to provide the Internet, she provided, people use it. A third party has appeared, which, on the basis of its conclusions, demands / wants something, so that people use Internet access only as they and nothing else.
So I asked if there is such a law. For from my position there are no complaints.



Rep: (299)
Your conclusions, funny allegories with all-inclusive, etc., do not have other moral claims besides.

Well, you know, I give examples from life that can not be refuted, and you call them funny allegories? What colors do I need to continue the conversation in order to be on the same wavelength with you in such a case?

Let's do so, in the further conversation to find the right direction ...
1. Yota does not owe anything to its subscribers if they have accepted the terms of the contract
2. The use of a product or service to bypass clearly spelled out rules is a violation (of law, agreement, moral standards — not important)
3. My figure as a victim is only a case, but not a matter of dispute (regarding your last post)

Post has been editedFrost_Imp - 24.10.14, 13:27



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 14:26*

Let's do so, in the further conversation to find the right direction ...
1. Yota does not owe anything to its subscribers if they have accepted the terms of the contract
2. The use of a product or service to bypass clearly spelled out rules is a violation (of law, agreement, moral standards — not important)
3. My figure as a victim is only a case, but not a matter of dispute (regarding your last post)

Let's.
1. Yota is obliged to provide services under the contract, of course no more.

2. No agreement is resurposed and acting in the territory of the Russian Federation, with citizens of the Russian Federation, cannot contradict / violate / inconsistencies in the legislation of the Russian Federation, post permissions, orders and other N.P.A. published by the government and registered in the Ministry of Justice. But in the salt, that in the Russian Federation, the rights of citizens from organizations, employees, etc. Organizations are regularly violated. Organizations are used by the legal illiterate of the population and apply to the conclusion of contracts violating the rights of citizens, because many citizens believe that any contract even violates their right to conclude. obligatory. In our history, these are consumer rights of citizens. Yota as a provider of Internet services has no right to limit people to access because of users of torrents while there is no ruling on the legislation of the Russian Federation, in their contracts with Yota consumers will write anything and prohibit even to eat in front of the monitor, but their requirements violating consumer rights not have legal grounds, thereby fulfilling the consumernot required .
Therefore, Yota does not resort to any measures of influence in relation to the users of torrents, because they know that initially their demands are illegal for not having access to torrents, and if you still begin to influence consumers who pay for the service, this is a direct litigation that they will lose.

3. I do not care who you are.

Post has been editedruslanbag43 - 24.10.14, 13:54



Rep: (299)
Since (thank God) we’ve decided on the first and third points, let’s focus on the second.
So far, both of us can only theorize about the legal literacy of the YOTA treaty. If there are so significant holes in it - sooner or later they will either be patched by themselves or through judicial practice. Until this happens, it is illogical to say that the operator is deceiving someone, the guilt needs to be proved.
Yota as an Internet service provider does not have the right to restrict people to access

In order not to grind water in a mortar, let's turn to already existing examples. You didn’t like my comparison with the prices for vouchers, but it’s a pity, because your judgments are in the clouds and have no any reasonable grounds. While I am talking about what has been around for a long time, it has been used for a long time and has not been a question to anyone for a long time.
So, an example of times: ticket "90 minutes". Unlimited number of trips on the overhead transport, but only for 90 minutes from the moment of the first trip, with a 10-minute limit between landings and only one metro ride. Unlimited? Yes. With restrictions? Yes. Why restrictions? So as not to trade the aisles and did not live too sweet.
Example two: Beeline's unlimited conversations. But only between Beeline subscribers, from one in the morning until six in the morning and only after the paid first minute. Unlimited? Yes. With restrictions? Yes.
etc. There are hundreds of examples. That is why I absolutely sincerely do not understand the intransigence with my position.



Rep: (160)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 15:19*
Untilboth of us we can only theorize on the legal literacy of the YOTA treaty ..

No, we are not both, I do not need to build theories, I just do a certified lawyer.

On the topic of access to torrents, as I understand, Yota will not be able to not be able, the restrictions go, just just because they want so much, but since they are only a service provider, their actions can be viewed as a violation of the constitutional right to receive information Art. 29, parts 4 and 5. What is already a violation not just consumer rights. Although of course access to torrents, it is strongly said, but on the torrents of various kinds of information is, literature on legislation, educational films, etc.

On the topic of mandatory compliance with the terms of the contract / agreement / transaction, I recommend to familiarize yourself with:
st. 168 parts 1 and 2 of the civil code codehttp://www.zakonrf.info/gk/168/about the deal!
st. 422 parts 1 and 2 of the civil code codehttp://www.gk-rf.ru/statia422about the contract!
In turn, you can refer to 421 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, on the free conclusion of a contract, but in part 4 of the same article, it is impossible to violate the rights defined by the legislation of one of the parties.

Now, seriously, the rights of citizens in Russia are often violated, it’s not only Yota who’s trying to limit access to torrents without explanation. Large state corporations violate the rights of citizens and not anywhere else, but in employment contracts. Most recently, I helped a comrade to sue Russian Railways under an employment contract, they won, but this giant does not rush all the other railway workers to change contracts to comply with the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.
Why citizens are not suing Yota? Well, because our citizens do not really like to sue anyone who needs to get on torrents and download, they will get.

Post has been editedruslanbag43 - 24.10.14, 16:26



Rep: (99)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 12:52*
How to read it in our discussion: I want to have a channel adequate to my payment. It does not suit me that someone is trying to get more for the same money, but at the same time making me worse.

As an old user Yota, I can declare: that you are bad, all the subscribers of iota are blamed, regardless of whether they comply with the terms of the agreement or not. There was a time, sitting on iotomodГ©m and paid 1400 rubles per month. But very quickly, people were gained similar to the modemmps and the speed fell so much that even unabled pages in the browser opened two minutes, and in Skype it became impossible to use the video (and the audio was periodically rushing). Called to technical support repeatedly, the answer "Basic stations are overloaded, but we work blah blah ...", but not a single BS in our area for several years it has never appeared. When it became possible to choose a tariff plan, connected the cheapest, since no difference was not observed, and then it was generally dumped with this garbage on a more "slow" (although compared to Yopta it is often faster), but more stable 3G Internet.
The problem is that the LTE base station is able to serve at the same time only a certain number of subscribers. If you exceed this number (even if it will be subscribers with low traffic) problems begin. So, to improve communication, it helps to capture and shoot extra users :)



Rep: (220)
Alex Klein @ 10.24.2014, 21:28*
The problem is that the LTE base station is able to serve at the same time only a certain number of subscribers.

This station can be strengthened, upgraded, as it were, and increased throughput, but this requires financial investments. But it is better to impose restrictions and just chop the cabbage.



Rep: (160)
...
This station can be strengthened, upgraded, as it were, and increased throughput, but this requires financial investments. But it is better to impose restrictions and just chop the cabbage.

Naturally, and then you can safely distribute among users that the fault of the slow Internet lies with those who download from torrents.

And then these support calls are received.http://youtu.be/BsjAzOGe0cI



Rep: (220)
Naturally, and then you can safely distribute among users that the fault of the slow Internet lies with those who download from torrents.

We have such a life :) operator. It is worth cheap old equipment written off from Europe. Got subscribers at the expense of cheap tariffs, and now the network is tough. And tariffs increased in value. They want to invest a penny, and at the exit to receive bags of money.

Post has been editedoldyoung_men - 25.10.14, 12:04



Rep: (87)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 12:52*
Once again, as a YOTA consumer, I want to draw attention to this: I am not satisfied with the state of things when a jeep is driving along the footpath, motivating my action with the phrase “it's the same road”, and I, with a baby carriage, are the person for whom the track was made, I had to keep clear of that bandit.

What, and in the parking lot on the sidewalk yota guilty? : D
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 12:52*
How to read it in our discussion: I want to have a channel adequate to my payment. It does not suit me that someone is trying to get more for the same money, but at the same time making me worse.

This can be decided by an elementary setting of the maximum speed, depending on the selected tariff, like all normal operators. The prohibition to transmit one sequence of bytes at a lower speed than others, is absolutely not necessary here.



Rep: (87)
Frost_Imp @ 10.24.2014, 14:26*
Let's do so, in the further conversation to find the right direction ...
1. Yota does not owe anything to its subscribers if they have accepted the terms of the contract
2. The use of a product or service to bypass clearly spelled out rules is a violation (of law, agreement, moral standards — not important)
3. My figure as a victim is only a case, but not a matter of dispute (regarding your last post)

1 and 2 - it seems obvious. But it’s not about the legal, but about the moral side. And in her, apparently, the position of Yota is not so smooth: D

Post has been editedscalar - 25.10.14, 13:48



Rep: (33)
I wonder why there are no restrictions on the modem, but on the phone? I have been using a USB modem from Yota for a long time, I think it goes to the mob. operator.

Your ad here could be

But the rules it is prohibited.



Rep: (299)
Vladis. @ 10.25.2014, 17:13*
I wonder why there are no restrictions on the modem, but on the phone? I have been using a USB modem from Yota for a long time, I think it goes to the mob. operator.

I think the license fee on the modem is more than on the phone. From that and there is no prohibition, it is logical



Rep: (33)
* Frost_Imp,
The difference is in fact not very great, because of this I do not see any reason for these restrictions.

Post has been editedVladis. - 25.10.14, 17:08



Rep: (220)
Frost_Imp @ 10.25.2014, 16:44*
I think the license fee on the modem more

Why? What is the difference which SIM card and with which tariff plan I insert into the modem? You have a logic like a baby.


Full version    

Help     rules

Now: 27.12.20, 18:26