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

“Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 890 posts

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#291

Post by koheripbal »

88913527 wrote: post #209
mercy_dude wrote: post #173

Good. The worst experience I ever had was with NY Times when I wanted to unsubscribe I had to go through multiple call/chats with a person and it was almost impossible since it was hard to get in touch with one. I am glad FTC is doing something others are afraid to do.

Anyone with access to a public library (photo ID will get you a free library card) can access eLibrary services that get updated daily. No need to pay for NYT, for WSJ, or any major national newspaper. By paying taxes, you're already paying for digital access to this media. I applaud the FTC's decision but I wish people realized there's more practical means for accessing media that is more frequently locked behind pa…

Not only is this not true everywhere, it can also be much more cumbersome to access.

Not to mention that supporting quality journalism is probably one of the best things you can do today to make the world better.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#292

Post by djrogers »

chii wrote: post #128
codingclaws wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Portugal is logical on some stuff. Another example is prostitution is legal but you can only advertise yourself. I wonder what other countries have prostitution set up like this. Or the speed traps that just trigger a red light. Decriminalization of all drugs obviously too.

> Another example is prostitution is legal but you can only advertise yourself. that's an excellent rule - because pimping should be illegal.

Pimping has little to do with advertising, it’s a form of slavery. Nothing would stop a pimp from forcing his workers to be responsible for advertising themselves.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#293

Post by koheripbal »

onionisafruit wrote: post #223
xg15 wrote: post #167

> including an option that’s “at least as easy” as the one to subscribe Weirdly enough this sounds like a loophole. I can already see some companies trying to bullshit their way through an investigation: "Oh sure, we don't provide online cancellation, because our way to cancel is even easier than online:" * presents a way to cancel that is in practice more difficult than online *. I think either mandating that cancel…

“What’s easier than making a quick phone call? It’s certainly easier than getting internet access, typing a url into a browser address bar, validating a ssl certificate, establishing an http session, authenticating with your credentials then finding and clicking the cancel button.”

Some might try that but one call with the FTC legal team will make any company stop that shit immediately.

You don't piss off gov't regulators

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#294

Post by xeromal »

lagadu wrote: post #29

In Portugal the law makes it so you can cancel any service using the same means that you used to subscribe it, so if they support subscribing online, unsubscribing also has to be doable the same way; same goes for via phone, personal or whatnot. It makes sense, prevents service providers from making it too difficult to terminate a contract.

This is the law in California too!

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#295

Post by chadash »

xg15 wrote: post #167

> including an option that’s “at least as easy” as the one to subscribe Weirdly enough this sounds like a loophole. I can already see some companies trying to bullshit their way through an investigation: "Oh sure, we don't provide online cancellation, because our way to cancel is even easier than online:" * presents a way to cancel that is in practice more difficult than online *. I think either mandating that cancel…

That's just what's in the summary. The actual policy [1] spells this out in more detail with examples:

> ROSCA requires negative option sellers to provide a simple, reasonable means for consumers to cancel their contracts. To meet this standard, negative option sellers should provide cancellation mechanisms that are at least as easy to use as the method the consumer used to initiate the negative option feature. For example, to ensure compliance with this simple cancellation mechanism requirement, negative option sellers should not subject consumers to new offers or similar attempts to save the negative option arrangement that impose unreasonable delays on consumers’ cancellation efforts. In addition, negative option sellers should provide their cancellation mechanisms at least through the same medium (such as website or mobile application) the consumer used to consent to the negative option feature. The negative option seller should provide, at a minimum, the simple mechanism over the same website or web-based application the consumer used to purchase the negative option feature. If the seller also provides for telephone cancellation, it should provide, at a minimum, a telephone number, and answer all calls to this number during normal business hours, within a short time frame, and ensure the calls are not lengthier or otherwise more burdensome than the telephone call the consumer used to consent to the negative option feature.

[1] https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements...

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#297

Post by xg15 »

chadash wrote: post #295
xg15 wrote: post #167

> including an option that’s “at least as easy” as the one to subscribe Weirdly enough this sounds like a loophole. I can already see some companies trying to bullshit their way through an investigation: "Oh sure, we don't provide online cancellation, because our way to cancel is even easier than online:" * presents a way to cancel that is in practice more difficult than online *. I think either mandating that cancel…

That's just what's in the summary. The actual policy [1] spells this out in more detail with examples: > ROSCA requires negative option sellers to provide a simple, reasonable means for consumers to cancel their contracts. To meet this standard, negative option sellers should provide cancellation mechanisms that are at least as easy to use as the method the consumer used to initiate the negative option feature. For e…

Ah, this sounds a lot better. Thanks for digging in!

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#299

Post by watchdogtimer »

This is one of the biggest benefits of using a virtual credit card from services like privacy.com or Capital One's Eno. Just create a card online specific to the service to pay for it, then cancel the card when you want to unsubscribe.

Capital One lets you create an unlimited number of cards at no charge.

Re: “Click to subscribe, call to cancel” is illegal, FTC says

#300

Post by mrfusion »

pnt12 wrote: post #283
bloak wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or the speed traps that just trigger a red light. This sounds interesting. Since when have they been doing this, and do you have a link to photos, video or a more detailed description?

It's a red-light with a speed warning and a detector - if you go over the allowed speed, it turns red, otherwise stays green forever. But we also have hidden radars which are not announced.

Sounds super dangerous though.
Post reply on HN