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

601–610 of 793 posts

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

#601

Post by inetknght »

efreak wrote: post #480
inetknght wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what, people should only be able to email you if you've previously emailed them? No, people should be able to email me as they would normally. I should be able to block senders, or entire domains. To use a direct example: if I decide that substack is shit because they subscribe people without consent (which is exactly true), then I should be able to block all things from substack and not just a single email addr…

Set up a filter from substack to the spam folder. I filter a number of domains directly to trash.

> Set up a filter from substack to the spam folder.

Can you walk me through the steps? Gmail doesn't let you create a filter which sends to the spam box. There used to be, but it was taken away. I know because I used it a lot.

Even if the feature was still there, it was still received instead of rejected, and it only moves the offending mail to the spam box instead of deleting it.

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

#602

Post by PlattypusRex »

codersfocus wrote: post #592
dccoolgai wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, from Super PACS (they were the Citizens United in _Citizens United_) to gerrymandering the Republicans do it first and worst. It's not even close. It's nice to think "both sides" but it's misinformed.

[flagged]

I didn't know posting racist conspiracy theories with no evidence was allowed on this website...

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

#603

Post by [deleted] »

theamk wrote: post #554
ksd482 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I have noticed companies do is resume emails after a year or so. They probably think people would forget about unsubscribing them after a year, and for the most part they are right. If I catch any of these email lists not respecting my unsubscribing, I immediately mark them as "spam". Gmail then doesn't send them to my inbox anymore. I don't think just one person marking them as spam hurts them, but at least I f…

I go one step further and for the lists which I don't remember subscribing to, I never click "Unsubscribe" - it's "Spam" right away.

[deleted]

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

#604

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

theamk wrote: post #554
ksd482 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I have noticed companies do is resume emails after a year or so. They probably think people would forget about unsubscribing them after a year, and for the most part they are right. If I catch any of these email lists not respecting my unsubscribing, I immediately mark them as "spam". Gmail then doesn't send them to my inbox anymore. I don't think just one person marking them as spam hurts them, but at least I f…

I go one step further and for the lists which I don't remember subscribing to, I never click "Unsubscribe" - it's "Spam" right away.

This is the way. Often times clicking unsubscribe is just sending them a notice that your address is an active inbox. They can abuse that knowledge or resell it. Better to mark as spam.

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

#605

Post by mason_mpls »

andrewla wrote: post #484
advisedwang wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> regulatory body straining at the limits of its remit The FTC's establishing laws make "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce" unlawful and give them power to regulate that. It doesn't seem to be straining at the limits of remit to rule that making it hard for people to end a subscription is unfair/deceptive.

To whom is this "unfair"? A business has a legitimate interest in preventing customers from taking advantage of bulk discounts (committing to a long term of service in exchange for lower prices), and customers have a legitimate interest in opting to discontinue a service that is no longer needed. Where to draw that line does not seem cut and dry to me. What is the specific nature of the "deception" -- what claim was…

making it really hard to cancel your subscription is unfair, almost by definition

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

#606

Post by shiroiushi »

megiddo wrote: post #226
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…

Let me regale you with the story of my Adobe Subscription cancellation. I had been considering learning Illustrator and to align myself, I decided to get a little skin the game. I signed up for the "monthly" subscription. I downloaded Illustrator, and this screenshot was my entire experience: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-prev... Suffice it to say, this didn't meet my expectations. I thus de…

This is a great story, but I'd like to also point out that it shows why the popular trend of only blaming a company's top management for that company's terrible behavior is wrong: many people have a tendency to want to sympathize with the lowest-level workers at a company, saying "they're only doing their jobs and have no say in business decisions" when interacting with customer service personnel. As you can see here, many (if not the vast majority) of these low-ranking foot soldiers are sociopathic assholes who really believe the corporate BS and are happy to do their utmost to screw over customers. It's not just the higher-up managers or CxOs, though they usually set the direction.

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

#607

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

Uehreka wrote: post #190

When people try and say that regulating stuff like this is impossible, I often think about how unreasonably great the regulations around “Unsubscribe” links in emails are. There really seems to be no loophole or workaround despite there being huge incentive for there to be one. Every time I click an “Unsubscribe” link in an email (it seems like they’re forced to say “Unsubscribe” and not use weasel words to hide the…

The problem is email regulations prevent you, the individual, from taking them to court for spamming you. As I recall only the government (like DOJ) can file a case for spam. Basically the US law was actually a bad compromise for everyday users

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

#608

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

Uehreka wrote: post #190

When people try and say that regulating stuff like this is impossible, I often think about how unreasonably great the regulations around “Unsubscribe” links in emails are. There really seems to be no loophole or workaround despite there being huge incentive for there to be one. Every time I click an “Unsubscribe” link in an email (it seems like they’re forced to say “Unsubscribe” and not use weasel words to hide the…

The laws are not unreasonably great. There is no actual blocker to them spamming you again. There’s many ways to maliciously comply like opting you out of a tiny category of their email and making that less obvious so they can keep emailing you unwanted spam. And the law doesn’t let you take them to court for abusing you. That’s why platforms like Bandwidth.com and Sinch have so many spammers as customers - it’s just revenue for them.

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

#609

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

greycol wrote: post #462
monksy wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I'm getting these emails from the KamalaHarris campaign. They're signed by the domain as well. I've never given money to the organiation, I'm not connected with their party, I've never signed up for the campaign, or interacted with them. However, I'm constantly being put on their mailing list soliciting for donations. I've seen how the campaigns pass around email addresses without consent. (Mostly from ActBlue) So…

Unfortunately political parties have more of a free pass on this as Republicans sued providers for their emails getting caught up in spam filters around 2022 (Who would've thought continuosly emailing people who click unsubscribe on your emails who then start reporting as spam would get you put on spam lists). Now political parties (and some bulk providers) have special tools to bypass rejection with some providers a…

This is incorrect to my knowledge. The free pass to spam political email was an explicit carve out in the can spam act, which lets them not comply with the same regulations everyone else has to. What you’re talking about is something much more recent, about what Google does on the receiving side of email with their spam filters. That was about Google’s compliance with an order from the federal election commission because their spam filters had biases that act like campaign financing. Google’s solution had bipartisan support among the commissioners as I recall.

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

#610

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

hobobaggins wrote: post #584
justinpombrio wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unsubscribe links are a fantastic regulation, but there is a workaround. I must have received at least a dozen emails from Brown after graduating despite unsubscribing to every email they sent. The trouble is they're endlessly creative about the lists they put you on. I'd get one email from "Alumni Connections" and then another from "Faculty Spotlight" and then another from "Global Outreach" and then another from "Ev…

They probably don't consider themselves (and, as a University, could probably make a strong case) that it's not Unsolicited Commercial Email (UCE), which is the only thing that CAN-SPAM applies to. And I have to disagree with the OP, though, because the only people who obey CAN-SPAM are the people who are generally not actually real spammers. CAN-SPAM really only helps you get unsubscribed from marketing emails, not…

The regulations also limited private lawsuits against spammers so we are stuck with no way of seeking justice or compensation
Post reply on HN