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

FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 793 posts

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#111

Post by admissionsguy »

Hasu wrote: post #90
admissionsguy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is the actual faithful steelman argument for the people who vote against this. My argument is different. There should not be any regulation except where existentially necessary (e.g. you need government to manage an army, because otherwise someone else will conquer the country, this sort of thing). Sure, most rules sound good in isolation. But in aggregate you end up with huge administration and 50% marginal t…

> Not able to cancel a subscription easily after you willingly enter into a relationship with some business is too tiny an issue to merit expanding the government monster. So in your world, I have to protect my credit card details from all evil people in the world forever (and also somehow prevent them from acquiring companies that I've previously given my details to), because it's okay for a company to keep charging…

In my world, you generate a single purpose card number for each subscription, or block the company at the bank level. My world is all about personal responsibility.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#113

Post by unethical_ban »

macinjosh wrote: post #60
llamaimperative wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Imagine attacking a law about making subscription cancellations easier by saying it degrades culture.

Really, of all the places to get worked up about the 10th amendment, a clear-cut, low-risk, low-intrusion expansion of consumer protection is a weird one.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#114

Post by ellisv »

Spoom wrote: post #5

Does the FTC actually have the power to set rules like this effectively now that Chevron deference isn't a thing? I'd imagine e.g. the New York Times, among others, will quickly sue to stop this, no?

The FTC has rule making authority but it will certainly be litigated.

My expectation is a case will quickly be brought in the Northern District of Texas, they'll rule it unlawful (following Commissioner Holyoak's lead), then it'll get bumped up to the 5th Circuit on appeal and they'll issue a stay.

I don't expect to see this rule take affect anytime soon, if ever.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#115

Post by _jab »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #96

It would be great to see the FTC go against predatory subscription services like Adobe. I'm fuzzy on the exact details, but I think they promoted a yearly subscription that was meant to look like a monthly subscription, where if you cancelled early they would charge you an exorbitant cancellation fee. I'm not sure how these new rules affect them. One recent idea I've had is that many online subscription services shou…

> One recent idea I've had is that many online subscription services should automatically pause if you stop using it.

Cool idea, but probably tough to enforce what “using it” means. I could see companies start sending newsletters to customers and calling that engagement

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#116

Post by metadaemon »

amatecha wrote: post #67

Nice. I canceled a service recently and I had to "continue to cancel" and click on other such "confirmations" such that I think I proceeded through 7-8 pages before my subscription was actually canceled. Truly manipulative and obtuse. That was Spotify btw. I should have recorded the process, as it was nearly comedic (if it weren't so hostile).

Yeah Spotify removed one of my family members from my 5-person subscription (only using 3 slots) so I immediately cancelled my subscription and had to deal with a lot of manipulative tactics to not cancel. This kind of behaviour 1, shouldn't be legal and 2, shouldn't be rewarded. I have plenty of Spotify alternatives, so this kind of behavior ultimately signals a floundering company resorting to hacks.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#117

Post by jodrellblank »

macinjosh wrote: post #65
coldpie wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FTC has been on a bit of a tear since Khan was appointed in 2021. I guess this one finally made it through the paperwork now. Sort by date here to see a bunch of tech-related stuff they've done under this admin: https://arstechnica.com/search/?q=ftc

lol, ok. I don't know what a "tear" is but everything listed there is either a lawsuit or news that a court struck down their policy. I don't see other policies like this one. Also check the dates, way off. haha

https://grammarist.com/idiom/on-a-tear/ - "On a tear means someone is in a state of energetic activity, often with a hint of recklessness or enthusiasm, usually after a period of quiet or inactivity."

Tear like rip, torn, shredding, not like cry.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#118

Post by lkbm »

ezfe wrote: post #7
Spoom wrote: post #5

Does the FTC actually have the power to set rules like this effectively now that Chevron deference isn't a thing? I'd imagine e.g. the New York Times, among others, will quickly sue to stop this, no?

NYTimes already allows cancelling online for most subscriptions, so I imagine this won't be a big issue for them.

USA Today, then. They do not, and most local papers are run by them. They have a "Cancel" button, and when you click it, it says you have to call them, during business hours.

This won't be the case in California, but I've observed this in both Indiana and Texas. I haven't subscribed to the local paper here in NC, because I can tell at a glance that it's the same company and I've already had to dealt with their shenanigans twice.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#119

Post by kibwen »

croes wrote: post #97
schmookeeg wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came to say this too, basically. The FTC is currently a bright candle in the swamp. I think we need a word for this work. Maybe disenshittification? :)

I doubt it will stay that way if Trump gets a 2nd term.

Even if he doesn't, the supreme court justices that he installed will just say, ackshually, we interpret the constitution to say that this is the purview of the judicial branch, natch.

Re: FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

#120

Post by admissionsguy »

llamaimperative wrote: post #79
admissionsguy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is the actual faithful steelman argument for the people who vote against this. My argument is different. There should not be any regulation except where existentially necessary (e.g. you need government to manage an army, because otherwise someone else will conquer the country, this sort of thing). Sure, most rules sound good in isolation. But in aggregate you end up with huge administration and 50% marginal t…

Can you point to an example that's close to what you're describing? Only thing that comes to mind is like de facto parts of Mexico, maybe Somalia?

The US is the closest, but not close and it is getting further away. The lawless parts of the world you mention do not take care of the existentially necessary bits.
Post reply on HN