Cable Companies Ask 5th Circuit To Block FTC's Click-to-Cancel Rule (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0175318575
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/24/1940235/cable-companies-ask-5th-circuit-to-block-ftcs-click-to-cancel-rule
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/cable-companies-ask-5th-circuit-to-block-ftcs-click-to-cancel-rule/
> Lawsuits were filed yesterday, about a week after the Federal Trade Commission approved a rule that "requires sellers to provide consumers with simple cancellation mechanisms to immediately halt all recurring charges."
>
> Cable lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association and the Interactive Advertising Bureau trade group sued the FTC in the conservative US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. The lawsuit claims the 5th Circuit is a proper venue because a third plaintiff, the Electronic Security Association, has its principal offices in Dallas. That group represents security companies such as ADT.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/cable-companies-ask-5th-circuit-to-block-ftcs-click-to-cancel-rule/
[2] https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/16/1550257/ftc-takes-on-subscription-traps-with-click-to-cancel-rule
But of course... (Score:2)
they went to the courts to whine about the injustice of their evil schemes being attacked.. and I wouldn't be surprised if the courts agree, seeing as "corporations are people" and therefore this is a "1st amendment" case.
Heaven forfend! (Score:3)
Do something customer-friendly?
No no no, let's spend a few million dollars to fight the rule instead.
That's some high-powered top management decision-making right there.
Re: (Score:2)
> That's some high-powered top management decision-making right there.
That's why they get paid the big bucks.
Any company that signs up for this ... (Score:2)
Should be found guilty of conspiracy to theft, with this as the main evidence.
You mean every company. (Score:1)
> Should be found guilty of conspiracy to theft, with this as the main evidence.
Before we assume this should somehow be limited to companies that sign up for this, we should probably actually read those EULAs we blindly accept every time.
We might find you mean every damn company.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, yes, EULAs are great.
Especially the part where they acknowledge that whatever their terms may say, they ARE superseded by whatever local, federal, etc. laws may dictate. Because sometimes those get written when bullshit has become too universal. Like if every damn company is up to the same gimmick.
And this is why (Score:2)
And this is why I subscribe to nothing. Fuck these ass-hat companies for the bullshit they pull. You want my business then treat me correctly.
How dare we? (Score:4, Funny)
They have a right to make it easy to screw you and difficult for you to do anything about it! If you don't like it, you can do business with some theoretical other company that doesn't have the same policy. And the fact that such a company is not available to you is YOUR problem.
ADT is the worst (Score:2)
A friend fell into ADT's trap. She was losing her house so we called to cancel her burger alarm service, and they said she could only cancel during the 30-day window before the contract renewed yearly, and her only option was to move the service to a new house. We explained that there wasn't a new house because she was going to be homeless and literally living on the street , and they didn't care. Pay up or go to collections, and don't forget to cancel next year.
Fuck ADT so much. They absolutely need thi
Re: (Score:2)
TiVo is the same. I had to pay a fee to cancelation my contract with them back in like 2009. They ended up double charging me, including for the tax. They refunded the second charge, except for the tax. They refused to make up the difference (only like $9) despite the fact that it was their fault due to them double charging me in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Call your credit company and tell them to stop payments. If they want to take you to court for some violation of contract it will cost them more than whatever they might hope to recover. Tell them that they can fuck off or you're going to start writing letters to consumer protection agencies. Don't expect companies to play nice. Be nastier than they are and most will realize you're not an easy target or that getting another nickel out of you will cost them a dime. Any complaining on social media is also enc
Just to play Devil's advocate (Score:2)
Cable companies usually do give promotional rates to "new" customers (cancel, wait a month, then sign up again), and if it's too easy to game the system they may make it a bit harder to qualify for those rates. It's possible this ends up being a case of be careful what you wish for .
Plus, I think the reason they offer promotional rates at all is because the majority of their customers don't game the system by cancelling and re-subscribing. If that process becomes as easy as clicking a button and starts hur
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a solution make signing up harder, force people to give proof of identity and then if they have been a customer in some period then don't give them a discount.
And as a bonus you can make leaving a bit harder under these rules.
Re: (Score:2)
First, who is going to go without connection for a month? Second why don't they just offer fair pricing from the start without forcing their customers to play games.
One can only hope (Score:2)
Every day I get a little bit closer to wishing the Purge would happen for real...
Re: (Score:2)
> Every day I get a little bit closer to wishing the Purge would happen for real...
Didn't the rich folks basically lock themselves up in their heavily-fortified compounds while the lesser folks murdered each other? I think The Purge is really just an analogy for the idea that you can't have another French Revolution if the commoners are too busy killing each other.
Re: (Score:2)
then find the air intake to their bunker and shove an automobile exhaust pipe in it and smog em
I don't think this can survive (Score:2)
The Loper ruling. The way that works if it's not explicitly written into the law the government can't do it. The ruling was designed explicitly to hamstring stuff like this. It was a giveaway to the people who bought Clarence Thomas his luxury motor coach and gave Thomas Alito all those vacations and paid off the student loans and other deaths for kavanaugh and Barrett.
Re: (Score:2)
The Loper ruling. The way that works if it's not explicitly written into the law the government can't do it.
What's written into the law is that All Unfair business practices are Illegal, and the FTC is tasked with determining which business practices are unfair and publishing regulations to that effect.
Ah, the bestest circuit (Score:2)
So they filed it in the kookoo land of Texas. It's dead, there's no way it survives the Filth Circuit.
5th Circuit beacuse ... Implying (Score:2)
> The lawsuit claims the 5th Circuit is a proper venue because a third plaintiff, the Electronic Security Association, has its principal offices in Dallas.
Implying the other plaintiffs aren't in that jurisdiction and they are judge/court shopping because they think the 5th Circuit will be more sympathetic than other courts, as the 5th Circuit is known to be super conservative / right-wing friendly often ruling against the FCC, FTC, FDA, etc... (And then often overturned by SCOTUS.)
[1]Why the Fifth Circuit Keeps Making Such Outlandish Decisions [theatlantic.com]
Google [2]5th circuit political leanings [google.com]
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2023/11/fifth-circuit-conservative-supreme-court/676116/
[2] https://www.google.com/search?q=5th+circuit+political+leanings
Reasoning? (Score:2)
> Companies ... to block a federal "click-to-cancel" rule that would force businesses to make it easier for consumers to cancel services.
And the companies are harmed by this rule because ...?
Re: (Score:2)
> And the companies are harmed by this rule because ...?
Because then their customers might cancel, then realize there's actually no competitor to switch to, and will complain to the government about that next.
Re: (Score:2)
They rely on receiving money for extra months from customers who wanted to cancel service By impeding and delaying them from cancelling service.
Re: (Score:2)
> And the companies are harmed by this rule because ...?
Because it gives power to the consumers, and obviously we can't have that!
Delay tactic (Score:2)
They know they're eventually going to lose but their suing because when the lawsuit is being dealt with they wouldn't have to comply, they'd still use the old cancellation-avoidance tactics. A lawsuit buys them a few years of extra income from subscriptions.
A big slap over their faces (Score:3)
That is exactly what these companies need.
Re: (Score:3)
I have some other ideas:
Dissolved and sold for parts.
Nationalized and run as a public utility.
Execute the current CEO every time they ask for the public to be screwed for their benefit
Honestly, you're much more generous than I am.