> A 1gbps connection has a limit of traffic it can push in a month, that is the limit of their "unlimited" offer.
If your interpretation of basic words is so wildly different from the norm that you already consider "1Gbps unlimited" a contradiction then surely you would never find yourself in a contract where subtler terms are in question.
What if I offer "unlimited ice cream, up to 1 cone per day for a month", and then after you pay for a month and ask for an ice cream cone every day for three consecutive weeks, I refuse and say your demands are excessive?
Sure, I might be within my legal rights to drop you as a customer the next month, but isn't it still a scummy and misleading way to advertise my service?
This is pretty much how MoviePass went bankrupt. The unifying gist is, the business model depends on acquiring customers that don't use the advertised service. But customers are smart and want to maximize the value they receive for their money.
Eventually, you either get an ISP-like situation where everyone has caps on their "unlimited" service and there is no room to disrupt the market, or you get MoviePass.
There is not going to be a free-market solution to this problem, because no service with defined limits will be able to compete with the "unlimited" service at the same price point, and there are no consequences to simply dropping the expensive customers.
