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

281–290 of 546 posts

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

#281

Post by brewdad »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #277
a_wild_dandan wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite example being tax season: The fun mini-game wherein the government knows what you owe, but makes you guess anyway, and guessing wrong could get you in trouble. So we pay experts to make better guesses for us. And some of us know about an Easter egg that might unlock a free guess. It's a delightful game.

The government only knows some of the information for your taxes. Now, it would be a massive improvement if the government just came up with a number based on your 1099s and W-2s and sent you a bill with "Did we miss anything?", but it's not fair to say the IRS knows exactly how much you owe.

For the overwhelming majority of Americans, W2 and 1099 forms capture all of their income for the year. Yes, some small percentage (less than 20% ??) will have other adjustments to make but that’s why other countries have you verify their info.

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

#282

Post by brewdad »

hayd wrote: post #81
RGBCube wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd prefer to see it as a non-government, not-for-profit service. Hard, because the government has authority, a random company does not. I'd still trust my government more than a random non profit company, if my trust decreases, I'd vote for different people to manage the country - which is not possible with companies.

Does the government really need to know every subscription that every person in the county has? This seems like massive overreach/invasion of privacy.

What makes you think a government like the US doesn’t have this info? We’ve already seen that they have no problem buying data they otherwise can’t collect directly from individuals.

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

#283

Post by brewdad »

drdaeman wrote: post #262
greyman wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For customers it is quite good, but to be fair, Netflix cancellation process is very straightforward, at least in Europe. There weren't any tricks, they just said see you later and cancelled.

I'm in the US, and it looks straightforward here too. It only gets slightly tricky if it's billed indirectly (through a partnership with some other company, where the subscription is offered as a part of a package). So I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

I have a free Netflix sub through Verizon. I no longer use Verizon but my sub is still active until November.

Netflix says I must go through Verizon to cancel but Verizon killed my account once I changed providers. I guess I’ll see what happens in November since I currently have no way to cancel.

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

#284

Post by brewdad »

mysterydip wrote: post #64
wdb wrote: post #57

I can understand why they don’t like it. But I think it’s a good idea to make cancelling just as easy as signing up. Want to make cancelling more difficult, well then you should make signing up same level difficult

"In order to sign up, you must speak to a customer service representative on the phone after waiting on hold at least 15 minutes"

You will then be transferred to a retention agent who will help you complete the signup process. Confirmation of signing up could take up to 5 business days.

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

#285

Post by pkaye »

pixelatedindex wrote: post #224
kevinmchugh wrote: post #55

Illinois says that any subscription must be cancelable in the same place it's created, so if I sign up for Hulu using my smart tv,I can cancel there as well. It's really good. People often complain about the proliferation of streaming services, but thanks to the law mentioned above, I'm able to subscribe and then immediately cancel. If I decide I want more time I can resubscribe later. I get to watch what I want with…

What if companies don’t follow that? For example it’s really easy to signup for sfchronicle but they make you jump through a lot of hoops to cancel.

If you reside in California and its an online subscription, there is a law related to that.

https://www.polsinelli.com/publications/subscription-service....

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

#286

Post by atahanacar »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #277
a_wild_dandan wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite example being tax season: The fun mini-game wherein the government knows what you owe, but makes you guess anyway, and guessing wrong could get you in trouble. So we pay experts to make better guesses for us. And some of us know about an Easter egg that might unlock a free guess. It's a delightful game.

The government only knows some of the information for your taxes. Now, it would be a massive improvement if the government just came up with a number based on your 1099s and W-2s and sent you a bill with "Did we miss anything?", but it's not fair to say the IRS knows exactly how much you owe.

Here, if you are a salaried worker, your employer handles the taxes and the mandatory public insurance. When talking about wages, it is always post-tax. Good part is, you don't have to waste time or effort on your taxes, bad part (or good depending on who you are) is, nobody thinks about taxes so they don't know the absurd amount of money they pay the government every month.

If you are self-employed, all you have to do is do the regular tax bracket income tax calculation on your net income (total income - work expenses) and add the fixed mandatory health insurance cost. It is very easy and can be done through e-Devlet or your bank's mobile app/website but many people just hire an accountant because mistakes can be costlier than the minuscule cost of hiring one. Another alternative is to get all your payments through a payment processor that handles taxes for you, which is the go-to option for side hustles.

If you are an employer, you do the same as above, but for yourself and all your employees.

For all the other extra taxes (car ownership etc.) you are notified if you owe anything and the payment is again as easy as online banking or e-Devlet. I've never heard anyone complain about the process of paying taxes. The absurd amount of taxes on the other hand...

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

#287

Post by hotpotamus »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #202
hotpotamus wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Charging me for a service I've asked to cancel doesn't really feel legitimate either. I've been through this with a gym that wouldn't cancel and then got sent to collections, which honestly just showed me how worthless collections is. So I get a few more spam calls or spam mails - I'm already ignoring those anyway.

The next time you apply for anything that depends on your credit history, the collections history will show up on the credit report (assuming you’re in a country that has those - far more than just the US) and either cause your application to be refused or to be approved with bad terms. This will stay on the credit report for years. It’s probably not worth anyone’s time to go after you more aggressively than that mer…

It never showed up on my credit report and I've not had any problem with any sort of application in the subsequent years.

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

#288

Post by ilyt »

bell-cot wrote: post #275

Daydream: Companies with customer-hostile subscriptions policies are all required to use the IRS's new "Advanced Corporate Tax Management" web site. Where the ever-shifting dark patterns of UI and ever-resetting defaults (especially the "voluntary extra contribution to the US Treasury") make their lives difficult. And that IRS site's webmasters collect a percentage on those "extra contributions", and appeals can only…

That's just making few shitty corporate jobs to click thru that while the shareholders are entirely unaffected.

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

#289

Post by ilyt »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #277
a_wild_dandan wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite example being tax season: The fun mini-game wherein the government knows what you owe, but makes you guess anyway, and guessing wrong could get you in trouble. So we pay experts to make better guesses for us. And some of us know about an Easter egg that might unlock a free guess. It's a delightful game.

The government only knows some of the information for your taxes. Now, it would be a massive improvement if the government just came up with a number based on your 1099s and W-2s and sent you a bill with "Did we miss anything?", but it's not fair to say the IRS knows exactly how much you owe.

Here in Poland you basically get the form with the numbers, add whatever else you need deducted and that's it. That if you're salaried worker, all is handled between your employer and tax office.

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

#290

Post by ilyt »

bragr wrote: post #211
Justsignedup wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

>The CEO is legally responsible for every illegal action taken by the company. You think CEO compensation is out of control now? Think about what you'd have to pay someone to be the CEO of any moderately large corporation if that were the case. You think your boss is up your ass now? Think about what they'll be like when they are strictly liable for anything you do. I'm not against more executive responsibility, but…

Ok then lighter version of it - pay it off their compensation (including stock and everything else, not just money), up to 5 years backward.

So if the fuckup is big enough they now owe 5 years of their pay. Should be motivating enough.

Post reply on HN