New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices • Hacker News Board

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#231

Post by myko » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:19 AM UTC

culi wrote: post #182

colechristensen wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am sympathetic to a perspective that says this is not the responsibility of a mayor of a single city... But also; who else is going to do it? With a population of 8.5 million if NYC was a state it would be the 13th largest so I'm quite all right with the city going beyond the normal purview of a city government.

And if it were a country, it would be the 10th largest economy in the world and the 105th most populous

Truly insane that the US political system fucks people who live in population centers. Horribly designed.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#232

Post by myko » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:21 AM UTC

antiframe wrote: post #179

littlecranky67 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because this is mandatory in the EU probably.

Even if that were true, Nintendo is better than most companies, which will use deceptive practices wherever they are allowed, even if they have to pay to maintain multiple systems and configurations.

Looking at you, Apple

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#233

Post by phyzome » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:34 AM UTC

kombine wrote: post #100

I remember trying to cancel NYT subscription a few years back and it was almost impossible. I didn't expect it from such a reputable establishment.

I ended up having to dispute credit card charges from Patreon because I couldn't solve captchas needed to log in or to talk to support. I won, but it was an annoying process, and now I use disposable/virtual cards.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#234

Post by phyzome » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:35 AM UTC

aubanel wrote: post #113

Probably a great decision, but why/how can it be decided at a local level by a mayor, instead of a federal level?

Any jurisdiction can pass a law unless there's a law against doing so.

For example, you couldn't do this in Massachusetts. A city would first have to petition the state for a new law allowing the city to pass such a local law.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#235

Post by erentz » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:41 AM UTC

evolve2k wrote: post #216

erentz wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not your property they care about. They usually want this because it includes liability insurance if you damage their property or someone else’s, or your negligence causes harm to someone.

In Australia we have very strong consumer protection law, here it’s expected (by the bank usually) the landlord has at least a minimum “landlord insurance” that covers all that stuff. For anything not covered, where a tenant does damage thats what the bond is for. Renter insurance should be optional. Actually I’m surprised that landlord insurance is not already occurring, imagine a building with 100 apartments, I’m s…

> Americans really do get screwed in so many ways.

Absolutely. I assumed the parent was talking about the US because that's the only place in the world I've encountered this.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#236

Post by aczerepinski » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:49 AM UTC

Larrikin wrote: post #66

aczerepinski wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once wrote code that checks location before hiding/showing the cancel button. It’s really absurd that the nice experience exists on all subscription sites by now but you only get to see it if your state demands it.

[flagged]

All of my degrees are in jazz music. My education was not utilized for this particular task.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#237

Post by aczerepinski » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:54 AM UTC

qmr wrote: post #83

aczerepinski wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once wrote code that checks location before hiding/showing the cancel button. It’s really absurd that the nice experience exists on all subscription sites by now but you only get to see it if your state demands it.

Why would you do something so immoral?

It used to be nobody could cancel online, and after my commit two states could. I think you may be overreacting here.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#238

Post by no-name-here » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:56 AM UTC

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #11

sxp wrote: post #5

It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…

At least in CA they need to disclose them now. Previously some restaurants would just hit you with a surprise mandatory tip.

> CA

Wasn’t the argument for tips that tipped workers had a low minimum wage, but CA now has a minimum for tipped workers of $16.90 (actually the same minimum wage for non tipped workers too)?

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#239

Post by mattkrause » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 2:56 AM UTC

spiderfarmer wrote: post #56

bikelang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really appreciate companies that are transparent with renewals. I’m sure it cuts down on customer support load a lot too. Kagi goes as far as not billing you if you don’t use their service in the prior month. I was pretty shocked the first time I got that email. Made me a customer for life.

Sadly, it's often just because they were forced by the EU and several other markets.

Why is that sad?

It does feel like it’d be “better” if good behavior came from the company’s intrinsic behavior but laws like this help (re)establish norms that encourage those sorts of actions.

Likewise, it’d be better if kids say please and thank you because of a genuine sense of gratitude, rather than just to avoid parental nagging—-but that nagging helps develop appreciation for others’ actions.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#240

Post by jancsika » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 3:14 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #27

sxp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From TFA: > Rule from Mamdani administration ... targets ‘junk fees’ > The city is also targeting so-called “junk fees” that raise the final price of everything from apartments to sporting events, with a proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front”, according to a release shared with the Guardian.

> proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front” This is going to be tough to enact, anywhere in the USA, even New York. There is nothing quite as American as "not knowing what you're going to pay for something until you have to pay." Whether it's your doctor bill, restaurant bill with tips and service fees, you…

> This is going to be tough to enact, anywhere in the USA, even New York.

You followed the link to the poll in the article, right? I haven't seen poll numbers that high on any poll in my lifetime. It shows people of all political affiliations know what junk fees are, and they are all hungry to have them banned.

Keep in mind that Mamdani's first "press conference" was nearly[1] all questions from influencers. I'm sure they are hungry to publicly record themselves encountering a junk fee should this rule pass, starting with the fitness influencer.

1: I counted one journalist ask a question. For free fake internet points, name that journalist. (Hint: it was a three-part question, and it wasn't a soft ball.)