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

631–640 of 890 posts

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

#631

Post by _2d30 »

eckesicle wrote: post #502

Meanwhile in Scandinavia: You are legally entitled to unsubscribe from any contract in any way that is most comfortable to you. [0] For example, you can: * send them a letter * send them an email * call them and tell anyone who picks up the phone * write it on a napkin and hand it to an employee All are equally legit and legally binding. Companies obviously do not want to deal with the manual overhead, so services ty…

> You are legally entitled to unsubscribe from any contract in > any way that is most comfortable to you. [0] > For example, you can: > * send them a letter > * send them an email > * call them and tell anyone who picks up the phone > * write it on a napkin and hand it to an employee

This is bad, actually. Unnecessarily raises costs.

The FTC's perspective is much improved over this.

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

#632

Post by xg15 »

jjk166 wrote: post #548
handrous wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does... the rule prohibit other methods of cancellation?

It requires just the one specific method of cancellation. Good actors will have multiple methods to make things easier for people, but the rules aren't for them. The rules are for the bad actors who don't want to make it easy, and who will do the absolute minimum required. As I said before, the issue is the creation of the loophole: by specifying that the same workflow must be used, by making your workflow highly dir…

I can understand that. I think the reasoning for tight restrictions is mostly to minimize the opportunity for dark patterns.

So instead of saying "cancelling must be possible through the same workflow as subscribing", regulators could also mandate something like the following:

Option A: Design a web unsubscribe workflow once as part of the regulation process, consult with UX expert to ensure it's accessible and low-friction, then mandate that providers must provide an unsubscribe flow that very closely resembles the designed workflow (using the same steps, same visual assets, etc).

Option B: Design a web API for unsubscribing, mandate that providers implement it and leave the UI to browser vendors or other third parties that have no interest in adding friction to the process. (This unfortunately risks a conflict of interest if browser vendors themselves offer subscriptions)

I'd honestly have wished that the EU had used one of those approaches for GDPR consent management - then we wouldn't have the current mess of intentionally tedious consent dialogs.

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

#633

Post by mynameisvlad »

_2d30 wrote: post #631
eckesicle wrote: post #502

Meanwhile in Scandinavia: You are legally entitled to unsubscribe from any contract in any way that is most comfortable to you. [0] For example, you can: * send them a letter * send them an email * call them and tell anyone who picks up the phone * write it on a napkin and hand it to an employee All are equally legit and legally binding. Companies obviously do not want to deal with the manual overhead, so services ty…

> You are legally entitled to unsubscribe from any contract in > any way that is most comfortable to you. [0] > For example, you can: > * send them a letter > * send them an email > * call them and tell anyone who picks up the phone > * write it on a napkin and hand it to an employee This is bad, actually. Unnecessarily raises costs. The FTC's perspective is much improved over this.

Customer choice and experience should almost always trump “increased costs”.

Plus, this ignores practically the entirety of the rest of their comment, where they explain that the extreme openness just means that companies make it absurdly easy to do so they explicitly don’t have to deal with all that.

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

#636

Post by mig39 »

scelerat wrote: post #589
mig39 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or the speed traps that just trigger a red light. This is the best. You trigger a red light because you're speeding, and everybody around you just glares at you. Including the old woman walking on the side of the street. It's like public shaming. Thanks bud, because of you, now we all have to sit at this red light and wait. Good job. That works so much better than the hidden speed camera ticket I get in the mail 6…

This would not work in Oakland. Cold red? zooooooommmmmm

The power of an angry glare from an old Portuguese woman (dressed in black) doesn't work in the US.

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

#637

Post by edgyquant »

aeternum wrote: post #572
ess3 wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this is missing the point. The point is that it’s illegal to reject a cancellation no matter the medium it was delivered on. So in order to not deal with the overhead and legal trouble of managing napkins that people slip your employees, you’re incentivized to make it as easy as possible

Because it does not solve the problem. Shady online subscription companies can simply put the office somewhere inaccessible and not accept e-mail/calls from customers. The law should outline mediums that companies must accept. IE have a published webpage or e-mail address that allows unsubscribe.

I believe the point is that this isn’t acceptable in the Nordic countries

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

#638

Post by rootusrootus »

sam0x17 wrote: post #625
rootusrootus wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This seems really annoying. The most annoying part is that in any thread like this the top comment invariably ends up being some smug observation that is clearly better than the US.

Comments like that though are really just a viable solution in disguise -- make the U.S. more like said country

That's impossible. Said country differs dramatically from the US on almost every meaningful measurement, from population size, density, style of government, cultural history, existing systems, etc.

And it begs the question that said country's system is actually better. In some metrics maybe it is, in others perhaps less so. And there's no reason to believe that US citizens' priorities on that will be the same.

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

#639

Post by kleer001 »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #402
tempodox wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd call that a “dark pattern in the physical world”.

People will do all sorts of ideological gymnastics to justify screwing the public out of money when they money lands in government coffers ad the end of the day.

Not untrue, but off topic.

People here are talking about unjust systems built to needlessly punish law abiding citizens monetarily and time wise. No gymnastics or ideologies necessary.

What comes to mind is the obscenity of civil forfeiture used without accompanying crimes upheld against the people who rightfully own said assets..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...

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

#640

Post by mig39 »

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.

The trick is to drive normal speed and at the very last second speed like a madman, so that it still has to cycle to amber then red just as you leave the intersection!
Post reply on HN