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

US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 599 posts

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#251

Post by bitcurious »

bluGill wrote: post #218
sneak wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US wasn’t the dominant superpower due to cooperation or agreement or leadership, it was the result of pure technological force. Oppenheimer, Teller, and countless nameless others at NASA and Lockheed and Boeing and DARPA. The US built the best weapons, spy planes, launch vehicles, satellites, and communications systems, and was willing to take a no-holds-barred approach to geopolitical strategy. This led to a cir…

It was also the result of Europe (now the EU) choosing not to oppose the US (at least mostly - they did in small areas). The EU has more people and combined could - if they wanted - be more powerful than the US. However they have never seen any point - they mostly (not entirely) agree with the US and so it would be a waste of their limited time to do that instead of what they were doing instead.

> It was also the result of Europe (now the EU) choosing not to oppose the US (at least mostly - they did in small areas). The EU has more people and combined could - if they wanted - be more powerful than the US.

Europe was destroyed by war, and then occupied by the US and USSR. The US liberated Western Europe and backstopped their independence. The Europeans didn’t choose to be on the American side, they were forced to by circumstance of their own making.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#252

Post by apwell23 »

beezlewax wrote: post #111

I've used a learning platform called Brilliant in the past. The cancellation process was so convoluted that it was impossible to cancel the account. Dark patterns and confusing language. They refused to refund me and after I thought I'd cancelled and I had to run a charge back from my bank. This is nefarious behaviour on their part and consumers need to be protected from it.

i only subscribe to services through app store on my iphone. even if costs me premium.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#253

Post by vladms »

Calvin02 wrote: post #232
noitpmeder wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest I don't think they do "no question asked refunds" for the consumer's benefit -- probably more so that they don't have to devote customer support resources to handling all the return requests they get. I'm sure you'd soon find it's not quite a guaranteed "no questions asked" process if you repeatedly return large expensive items.

Have you ever tried to return something bought at a clothing store? I made that mistake once in France. You’re creating an absurd standard “repeatedly return large expensive items” but even every day things are way easier in the US.

I think it's more about the type of store. I was with acquaintances returning clothes at high end stores (meaning: expensive) and service was great. I would not try that at a low end store (meaning: cheap).

From my point of view processing a return costs the store money. If they don't make a high margin they will (try to) discourage it. If in US everywhere they are fine with it for me it means they make higher margins everywhere.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#254

Post by bluGill »

sensanaty wrote: post #137
silisili wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just offended siriusxm, every newspaper, and every gym in the country.

Man what the fuck is it with gyms? I'm not even in the US, but even in the Netherlands where these kind of things are generally super simple and hassle-free (by law) I've had some nightmarish, headache inducing situations with gyms. I've literally never encountered anything else, ever, nearly as bad as dealing with gyms and their contracts in my entire life. It was a million times easier closing brokerage accounts wi…

Most gyms are over subscribed - if everyone who has a membership actually went to the gym they wouldn't have enough space/equipment for everyone. They would need to raise their rates to afford more. That is those who have a membership but don't go to the gym are subsidizing those who do go to the gym.

The more expensive gyms are not this way. They will let you cancel easily. They will often out of good customer service pause your membership if you don't visit at all for a month. However they cost twice as much and often have worn out equipment that a much cheaper gym would have replaced. As such if you really visit a gym one that makes canceling is hard.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#255

Post by makeitdouble »

mrtksn wrote: post #209
mokash wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>True but generally speaking American companies usually have much better customer service and better refund policies than European ones. The issues usually stem when a company corners the market or has no viable alternatives. this does not track with my experience

Any examples of American company having worse customer experience than European ones? I will give you 2 for the opposite: Amazon and Apple do no question asked refunds all the time. Much higher bar than European regulators require.

Isn't it best if you don't need refunds all the time ?

Ordering on French consumer shops I got exactly what I asked for, at a reasonable price in a reasonable time.

Product descriptions are actually helpful and there is little risk to get some fake product instead.

Amazon's customer support was incredibly helpful, but that's not what I want to pay for.

FWIW, I moved to AliExpress for the stuff I'm ok to gamble with.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#256

Post by thrance »

bluGill wrote: post #243
standardUser wrote: post #23

The 8th circuit court of appeals is the most conservative, with only one judge appointed by a Democratic president.

In this case it quickly becomes clear that the court was right. The ends do not justify the means. Score one for conservatives for following/enforcing the law I guess.

Weird how they only enforce the law when it serves their interests though.

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#257

Post by [deleted] »

injidup wrote: post #178
beezlewax wrote: post #111

I've used a learning platform called Brilliant in the past. The cancellation process was so convoluted that it was impossible to cancel the account. Dark patterns and confusing language. They refused to refund me and after I thought I'd cancelled and I had to run a charge back from my bank. This is nefarious behaviour on their part and consumers need to be protected from it.

I call bullshit. https://help.brilliant.org/en/articles/741701-how-can-i-canc...

[deleted]

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#258

Post by miltonlost »

rayiner wrote: post #242
John23832 wrote: post #236

What consumer does this serve at all? What citizen does this serve at all? This only serves to allow firms to erect effort barriers to keep rent seeking fro their customers. The "gotcha" that the Khan FTC didn't "follow the rules making process" is parallel construction.

Courts don’t make decisions on whether executive rules are told or bad, serve consumers or not. The main oversight they have is ensuring compliance with procedural rules and statutory technicalities.

[flagged]

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#259

Post by cindyllm »

miltonlost wrote: post #258
rayiner wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Courts don’t make decisions on whether executive rules are told or bad, serve consumers or not. The main oversight they have is ensuring compliance with procedural rules and statutory technicalities.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: US Court nullifies FTC requirement for click-to-cancel

#260

Post by miltonlost »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #166
guelo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who warned them?

A then-commissioner who is now the head of the FTC.

Ah so a Trump appointee and 2 judges appointed by Trump. Now that's a group I would never trust to follow the law.
Post reply on HN