How would you interpret the following statement (concerns VOIP)

[brant]

Unauthorized Use of Third Party Services
You agree that the phone on which your xxxxx Service is activated may not be used to access any third-party services equivalent to Services provided, or Services made available, by xxxxx even if you declined to purchase such Services from xxxxx. Your phone contains programming designed to enable access to xxxxx Services only. Using any manual or electronic means to circumvent any restrictions placed on your phone or to modify without authorization any programming supplied on your phone is a violation of your Agreement.

Would you interpret "may not be used to access any third-party services equivalent to services provided" to say this company prohibits you from using a VOIP service (vonage, lingo, etc. . .)?

[deltafowler]

What kind of phone is it?
By using the word "equivalent", they left the barn door wide opened.
You can use it for lesser or greater services, just not equivalent ;)

[LarryFlowers]

That sounds suspiciously like the verbage being used by AT&T regarding the use of Skype on the iPhone?

Apple's unique treatment of the new Skype Internet calling feature on the iPhone — the free app works only on Wi-Fi, not the cellular or 3G network — is raising concern among public-policymakers and consumer advocates.

They say it's a clear example of AT&T the sole carrier of the iPhone in the U.S., trying to handicap a direct competitor.

"Consumers will pay the price for AT&T's blocking," says Chris Murray, senior counsel to Consumers Union. By using Skype on the iPhone, consumers can sidestep AT&T, allowing them to get by, potentially, with cheaper voice plans that offer fewer minutes. Consumers can also save a bundle on international calls.

Jim Cicconi, AT&T's top public policy executive, says AT&T has "every right" not to promote the services of a wireless rival.

"We absolutely expect our vendors" — Apple, in this case — "not to facilitate the services of our competitors," he says.

"Skype is a competitor, just like Verizon or Sprint or T-Mobile," he says, adding, Skype "has no obligation to market AT&T services. Why should the reverse be true?"


Would you interpret "may not be used to access any third-party services equivalent to services provided" to say this company prohibits you from using a VOIP service (vonage, lingo, etc. . .)?