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

Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

marketingreportoptout.visa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 161 posts

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#101

Post by selimthegrim »

anonymousiam wrote: post #15
Johnny555 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The credit card companies make so much money that reimbursing fraudulent transactions is almost a rounding error The credit card companies (i.e. Visa) don't reimburse fraud, they leave that to the issuing banks (i.e. Chase, Capital One, etc.... whoever you got your card from)

American Express handles their own fraud cases. Their cards are generally not issued by banks. I have no association with them other than being a card member since 1982, but their customer service is far better than Visa/MC, and yes, you can get a card from them with no annual fees + perks.

Does anyone know what AmEx is doing wrt Russia?

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#102

Post by iudqnolq »

rootusrootus wrote: post #84
manquer wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do individuals have standing against FTC if they don't action ? Lack of FTC action is causing you material harm , or is there immunity against FTC as well?

> Do individuals have standing against FTC if they don't action ? You can petition them, certainly. Individuals and business are not able to sue the FTC.

It's complicated, but under certain circumstances you can sue agencies for not doing something. It depends on the specific laws governing the specific agency and how you've been harmed by the inaction. Broadly speaking, the Administrative Procedures Act required agencies to have procedurally fair processes. If you're concretely harmed by an agency's inaction and you can show they didn't follow the correct processes, you can sometimes win.

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#103

Post by marcosdumay »

deathanatos wrote: post #85
umeshunni wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't Reddit

This might not be Reddit, and the parent's point might be crudely made, but watch the fines companies are awarded, and put it in terms of revenue, and then scale it to /$60k USD, to put it terms of how "big" of a fine it would be, from an average person's pocket; you'll find that many of these fines are in the sub-dollar range, which to me, makes it completely fair to dismiss them as any sort of real penalty.

That's a very interesting point, but make sure to do it with profit, and not revenue. Revenue is meaningless on this context.

(If it's a sub-dollar fine over revenue, it will probably be around $20 on profits, what just moves the needle from the cost of home-made coffee to an airport coffee.)

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#104

Post by micromacrofoot »

xeromal wrote: post #93
micromacrofoot wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't Instagram either, can you clarify what this is supposed to mean?

Hackernews discourse is supposed to at least take some thought when making a comment. >ah cos big corps just do what they want with no penalties unless they piss off enough people that the politicans feel like they need to make a point.. ...we're well into gangster capitalism now This is just a lazy comment.

ah ok, so reddit is known for lazy comments?

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#105

Post by convolvatron »

drdaeman wrote: post #86
charcircuit wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

A single one - barely any. Although you have to be a Superman to be able to entirely process it in 1ms. At scale, it might take up to a few minutes off your day and under certain circumstances (heavy spam) even start contributing to a mental fatigue. It's a minor nuisance but a nuisance nonetheless.

don't forget that that the presence of spam makes it quite a bit more difficult to manage your own email

regardless, it introduces a non-zero chance that legitimate email might be misclassified

it seems like everyone in the ad industry has this opinion - if you don't like it, just delete it and move on. but there are thousands of them, and somewhere in there is that job offer I really need.

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#106

Post by sidewndr46 »

whathappenedto wrote: post #31

When I tried to get my annual credit report, I find that the credit agencies constantly have trouble validating my identify online even though I have one of the simplest reports. A single same address for decades, no loans, paid off every month. They randomly will say that I can't be verified, and I need to snail mail them copies of a bunch of identifying documents to get my credit report. I imagine this is a common…

Same here, there is at least one credit union that essentially treats me as persona non grata when I contact them.

Somehow each time that I go to do a hard credit check, they are able to provide a credit score for the lender however.

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#107

Post by boatsie »

This is what is so frustrating about companies harming many people by small amounts. There is no actual recourse for the individuals. If an individual missed a credit card payment by mistake, the bank would assuredly charge them a late fee, report the payment to the credit agencies, etc. But when the company makes a mistake like this, no penalty, no consequences. It really should be the other way around—we should extend grace to the person rather than the company, yet the company basically has more “rights” in a way than the person.

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#108

Post by WaxProlix »

boatsie wrote: post #107

This is what is so frustrating about companies harming many people by small amounts. There is no actual recourse for the individuals. If an individual missed a credit card payment by mistake, the bank would assuredly charge them a late fee, report the payment to the credit agencies, etc. But when the company makes a mistake like this, no penalty, no consequences. It really should be the other way around—we should ext…

Gah, it's an asymmetric war. I feel like, as programmers, we should be able to leverage automation for individuals to fight back smarter where corpos fight harder.

Might be hard to do without incurring the ire of the state, whose allegiances will probably not lie with the bearded fat man spamming Visa's webforms with the contents of their own emails or whatever.

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#109

Post by ShakataGaNai »

bprasanna wrote: post #68

Dark patterns all around! Same i experienced with Coinbase after registering, when i searched for delete account, there is no such thing!

https://help.coinbase.com/en/coinbase/managing-my-account/up...

Re: Visa's marketing opt-out has been down for over a week. Is this a legal issue?

#110

Post by deathanatos »

marcosdumay wrote: post #103
deathanatos wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might not be Reddit, and the parent's point might be crudely made, but watch the fines companies are awarded, and put it in terms of revenue, and then scale it to /$60k USD, to put it terms of how "big" of a fine it would be, from an average person's pocket; you'll find that many of these fines are in the sub-dollar range, which to me, makes it completely fair to dismiss them as any sort of real penalty.

That's a very interesting point, but make sure to do it with profit, and not revenue. Revenue is meaningless on this context. (If it's a sub-dollar fine over revenue, it will probably be around $20 on profits, what just moves the needle from the cost of home-made coffee to an airport coffee.)

I disagree that profit is the right metric when scaling a fine to a normal person; $60k is the average American's revenue (not profit — I'm not even sure how I'd calculate profit for a human, in a year), so I use the corresponding amount — revenue — when comparing.

For example, a $10 fine to a company w/ a net loss but $1B in revenue is clearly not a large fine.

Post reply on HN