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

Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#51

Post by DangitBobby »

koolba wrote: post #31
DangitBobby wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you defending obvious theft?

> Why are you defending obvious theft? Where’s the theft? It’s perfectly normal to have a fee for breaking a lease. And that’s what an annual subscription paid monthly is anyway. It’s a commitment for an extended period of time. If you could just stop paying and retain the discounted rate, what is an annual subscription vs a monthly one?

Is upping the fee and automatically confirming the contract without a re-up "perfectly normal"? Seems doubtful.

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#53

Post by DangitBobby »

whyenot wrote: post #33
DangitBobby wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you defending obvious theft?

Because it is not obviously theft. If you are getting a discount for making a year-long commitment, and then cancel, breaking that commitment, isn't a cancelation fee appropriate?

Is that the whole story? Or did you miss literally half of what GP said happened?

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#54

Post by DangitBobby »

sanswork wrote: post #27
hartator wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn’t auto renew and auto commit though.

Why? It's a subscription auto-renew is the default. As for auto-commit why would they change your subscription choices on you without you choosing it?

Because it's not the price you agreed on? Crazy what you people are willing to accept as normal.

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#55

Post by paulddraper »

charcircuit wrote: post #47
dheera wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll invoice you but don't actually pay. They aren't going to take you to court over a $50/month subscription; the easier route for them is to just disable your account, which is what you wanted anyway. Never give them your actual residential address (they don't need to know it), birth day, or SSN, or be tricked into giving them such. If they ask on any customer service chat or phone, the answer is they don't need…

What you are describing is fraud.

From which party?

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#56

Post by HDBaseT »

sanswork wrote: post #19
IneffablePigeon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had been paying monthly for 13 years straight and they still demanded a cancellation fee because it turned out I was on an annual commitment (which by the way they hiked the price of by 50% with a month’s notice and by the time you notice the larger payment go out you are in a whole new 12 months). So yes, I complained about that.

Ok so you were on an annual plan to save money and when you cancelled you had to pay an exit fee to account for the annual discount. Seems reasonable to me. They gave you a months notice of the price increase and you didn't cancel until after it went into effect?

An annual plan shouldn't require a termination fee. If I purchase an Annual Subscription, I should be able to cancel it whenever, with no fee whilst retaining the benefits for my subscription, as I paid for a whole year up front anyways....

Adobe software being a subscription service is nonsense too, but thats for another discussion.

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#57

Post by HDBaseT »

sanswork wrote: post #27
hartator wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn’t auto renew and auto commit though.

Why? It's a subscription auto-renew is the default. As for auto-commit why would they change your subscription choices on you without you choosing it?

What happens if Adobe changes the price from $299 yearly to 29k?

Do you think that is fair? After all they gave you 30 days!

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#58

Post by sanswork »

HDBaseT wrote: post #56
sanswork wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok so you were on an annual plan to save money and when you cancelled you had to pay an exit fee to account for the annual discount. Seems reasonable to me. They gave you a months notice of the price increase and you didn't cancel until after it went into effect?

An annual plan shouldn't require a termination fee. If I purchase an Annual Subscription, I should be able to cancel it whenever, with no fee whilst retaining the benefits for my subscription, as I paid for a whole year up front anyways.... Adobe software being a subscription service is nonsense too, but thats for another discussion.

Yes, and if you get an annual plan from adobe and pay up front there is no fee for cancelling. The fee is if you get an annual plan with a monthly payment and cancel early.

I remember when it was like $600 for photoshop for a single version(like 25 years ago so what would that be today?). The subscription pricing is a steal.

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#59

Post by sanswork »

DangitBobby wrote: post #54
sanswork wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? It's a subscription auto-renew is the default. As for auto-commit why would they change your subscription choices on you without you choosing it?

Because it's not the price you agreed on? Crazy what you people are willing to accept as normal.

The notification is telling you of the new price. If you don't do anything at that point then it is the price you agreed on.

Re: Shutterstock to pay $35M over hard-to-cancel subscriptions

#60

Post by sanswork »

HDBaseT wrote: post #57
sanswork wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? It's a subscription auto-renew is the default. As for auto-commit why would they change your subscription choices on you without you choosing it?

What happens if Adobe changes the price from $299 yearly to 29k? Do you think that is fair? After all they gave you 30 days!

Why do you feel the need to make up ridiculous numbers?
Post reply on HN