Abuse is certainly the wrong term, putting the blame on the user. Still, I think a ‘fair use’ is no longer given if you upload 20 terabytes or so. As usual, a minority overuses free services until they have to shut down or restrict usage.

“Abused” service they were advertised. Now it is misadvertisement.

Calling it “abuse” is a weird PR move. If your service is good enough, this is bound to happen with an unlimited storage plan. This is basically a win on their part since they got people to sign up for their service. Why shame your user base?

Don’t use the fucking word unlimited if it has limits? Something that has a limit, no matter how high, is not unlimited.

This reminds me of how Skype always had limits in the fine print of its unlimited calling plan back in the day when we paid for minutes on cellphones.

Or, y’know, how current cellphone data plans are only unlimited up until the point where you’ve used enough and then become “deprioritized.”

Or how backblaze offers unlimited plans on Windows and Mac but not on Linux because Linux users tend to actually know how much storage they’re using.

Companies have a number that is the profitable point for whatever unlimited plan they’re offering. They just want to be able to advertise “unlimited” since that’s what customers want and they hope people don’t go over their “profitable usage” metric.