Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 546 posts

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#181

Post by synetic »

andsoitis wrote: post #174
synetic wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post you responded to was about situations in which companies make it hard to cancel. Clearly the person was expressing frustration that for many companies signing up is easy and canceling is hard. They want this situation to be rectified. No one cares that you had an easy time cancelling a service. You telling us that cancelling D+ was easy is only meaningful if you think this is the case in all situations for a…

> You telling us that cancelling D+ was easy is only meaningful if you think this is the case in all situations for all companies and you argue that this is so. Look, I understand that not all companies are customer centric and I can see you and others feel that you’ve been extorted by some conapnies. I argued in good faith given the article is literally about D+ and Netflix and the person I responded to said “The co…

The article is about the FTC requiring companies to make it easy to cancel. The article specifically stated that Disney and Netflix are in opposition to this. A person wrote a comment stating that they think companies should face legal consequences for not making cancelling easy. You write that “extort” is the wrong word. Then you say that cancelling D+ was easy for you. None of your posts on this topic are relevant.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#182

Post by glimshe »

Swenrekcah wrote: post #158
glimshe wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being a basic utility is not relevant for the legal implications here, as the renewal terms aren't tied to being an utility - that was just a familiar example. The renewal laws are clearly specified in the contract you accept when signing up for these services, for instance Disney Plus says: "If you do not timely cancel your subscription, your subscription will be renewed at the price in effect at the time of the…

Of course I realise the terms and they may even be legal someplaces. But the basic reality is that none of these firms would enter into a contract with terms like these because they are outrageous. Just think about it. The act of doing nothing over a certain short time period is supposed to legally bind you in a new contract and even with unknown pricing? This is not business between equals and people behaving this w…

Well, you can in theory cancel at any time. In the case of Disney and Netflix, it is pretty easy (or at least used to).

I don't do yearly subscriptions for this very reason, though.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#183

Post by synetic »

ryandrake wrote: post #180
sonicshadow wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this is HN and it's more important to launch definition critiques than to discuss substance ever. I think half of HN came from the horrible world of high school policy debate

Remember, you're talking about a community composed largely of software developers, whose livelihoods are built on their ability to find a missing negative sign in 100,000 lines of code. When faced with a large paragraph of text full of complexity and nuance, they're naturally going to find that one word that's wrong and pedantically nit-pick it to death, ignoring the overall point and substance being conveyed.

Thank you for this. I got a laugh out of it. I particularly liked the 100,000 lines of code line.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#184

Post by sonicshadow »

ryandrake wrote: post #180
sonicshadow wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this is HN and it's more important to launch definition critiques than to discuss substance ever. I think half of HN came from the horrible world of high school policy debate

Remember, you're talking about a community composed largely of software developers, whose livelihoods are built on their ability to find a missing negative sign in 100,000 lines of code. When faced with a large paragraph of text full of complexity and nuance, they're naturally going to find that one word that's wrong and pedantically nit-pick it to death, ignoring the overall point and substance being conveyed.

Lol this even fits with how they do PR reviews and code critiques. When I submit a long PR for review, I know that none of the comments will be substantive or useful. They'll just be meta-critiques about how the headers aren't alphabetized or private members need to come after public. Not about the actual content.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#185

Post by tehwebguy »

Justsignedup wrote: post #163
ryaneager wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company be responsible for their actions? Where in heaven did you get such a dastardly idea?

The solution to like 90% of all problems: The CEO is legally responsible for every illegal action taken by the company. This is also true for all managers down to the department that caused the illegal action. That's it. Nothing else. You'll see a massive amount of bad behavior from companies instantly stop. When your neck is on the line, you won't do it. Or you'll quit. However given history, this will never occur.…

There isn’t some bug that can be fixed that would suddenly make this work. DAs, states attorneys and attorneys general have all the power in the world to make life hell for any company doing bad things. They just don’t want to.

Think about that and consider the cascading consequences you’d face for years in most states if you let your driver’s license expire and get pulled over.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#186

Post by stn8188 »

atum47 wrote: post #82
lolinder wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know the details of what happened here? Unless you know otherwise, it sounds like your father probably ended up clicking the "renew subscription now" button when prompted, not that simply logging in triggered the charge. I'm ready to believe that the renewal prompt was heavily geared towards making it easy to renew, and Netflix should be required to make it equally easy to cancel, but unless you know he didn't…

I have talked to my father, he did not clicked anything. By simple watching after the final date they gave us it triggered a renewal. the solution proposed in the chat was to logout every device at once and delete my credit card so that wouldn't happen again.

I just went through something similar. When I canceled my Netflix a couple of weeks ago. I noticed that it would be very easy to restart the subscription for anyone who was still logged in, so I logged out all devices and attempted to remove the credit card. Interestingly, they won't let you remove your credit card unless you have another payment on file even if you don't have an active subscription. I just changed the password so nobody who I previously shared it with could accidentally log back in.

The most ridiculous thing is that about a year ago I specifically bumped up my plan to the more expensive one because we were sharing with some family members. As a result of them enforcing this sharing rule, we ended up canceling and they get nothing from us now.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#187

Post by treecrypto »

Justsignedup wrote: post #163
ryaneager wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company be responsible for their actions? Where in heaven did you get such a dastardly idea?

The solution to like 90% of all problems: The CEO is legally responsible for every illegal action taken by the company. This is also true for all managers down to the department that caused the illegal action. That's it. Nothing else. You'll see a massive amount of bad behavior from companies instantly stop. When your neck is on the line, you won't do it. Or you'll quit. However given history, this will never occur.…

Wouldn't this make it possible for a disgruntled employee to do something illegal, and falsely claim they did it on the company's instructions?

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#188

Post by otikik »

ivolimmen wrote: post #28

One of the great perks of living in the Netherlands. We already have this. If you can sign up in 1 minute using the web you must also be able to cancel in one minute using the web (For the Dutch: Wet van Dam). This rule is only for consumers not for businesses. Consumers are very well protected here.

> Wet van Dam

The mental image that produces in someone not fluent in Dutch:

https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-x8dfmo/products/10767/images...

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#189

Post by rogual »

didsomeonesay wrote: post #138

Subscription providers will be as shameless as allowed by law. Or worse. I try to cancel subscriptions immidiately after signing up when i only want the service for a limited time. For an Italian newspaper's online subscription, after contacting them for cancellation via web form, my family was informed: you have to call a number and that cancellations will only be accepted 1 day before the end of the subscription. L…

Adobe do that "cancellation window" trick too. I'd never seen it anywhere else, though; I thought they were uniquely scummy.

Re: Disney, Netflix, and more are fighting FTC's 'click to cancel' proposal

#190

Post by rogual »

Strange to see Netflix on the list, because here in the UK it's extremely easy to cancel. You just click once and it's done, and you still get to watch for the rest of the month.

I'm sure it can't be because of UK law, because we have plenty of other companies here who make cancellations awkward.

Post reply on HN