While the new data policy probably irritated many of AT&T's customers with unlimited data contracts, a clause in those contracts prevents the customers from banding together to take the company to court.

To settle a dispute with the carrier, customers must enter binding arbitration or sue in small claims court. Spaccarelli chose the small claims route because it didn't involve hiring a lawyer. It also doesn't require parties in the proceeding to keep their mouths shut after a decision is rendered, as arbitration does.

Before the court, Spaccarelli claimed his phone was being throttled after reaching 1.5 to 2.0 gigabytes of data during a billing cycle. While voice calls and text messaging were relatively unaffected by the throttling, he conceded, Web browsing was painfully slow and streaming video nonexistent.

During the small claims session, AT&T argued that its actions were justified because Spaccarelli violated the terms of his contract with the carrier by "tethering" other devices to his smartphone. Tethering allowed those devices to connect to the Internet through his phone, which would increase Spaccarelli's data consumption.

AT&T's arguments didn't sway Judge Russell Nadel. He ruled the carrier's actions unfair and ordered AT&T to pay Spaccarelli for his estimated data usage for the remainder of his contract -- $85 a month for ten months -- plus court costs.