
California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online - danso
http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/07/thanks-to-california-a-news-site-or-other-business-now-has-to-let-you-cancel-your-subscription-online/
======
harryh
For places that require a phone call I came up with a trick to cancel via
email. If they reply back via email and say I have to call them, I tell them
I'm deaf and can't talk on the phone.

Works every time.

~~~
gordon_freeman
but would not that make you feel a little guilty as you are lying to the
person just to cancel a subscription?

~~~
JackCh
Despite what we teach small children, lying is not immoral. Lying is _amoral_.
The circumstance and motivation of a lie determine whether that particular lie
is moral or immoral.

There are times when it's moral to lie, other times when it's immoral to lie,
and still other times when morality hardly has anything to do with it at all
(such as the above scenario.) We tell small children that it's immoral to lie
because we don't trust their moral judgement and would prefer they always tell
us the truth.

~~~
perl4ever
I don't think people grow out of the need to follow moral rules as much as you
imply. Sooner or later, there comes a time when it is overwhelmingly in a
person's interest to lie (or some other transgression). If they are purely
rational, they will do it. If they think deeply about morality, they will
rationalize why it is right to do what is in their interest. The point of
inculcating honesty and other virtues is so one is habituated to the point
that dishonesty is preempted when it really counts. Reasoned moral judgement
is not an unmitigated good, because it opens the way for bias and hinders the
operation of trust needed for relationships.

~~~
fjsolwmv
Lying isn't bad. Hurting people is bad. There are many totally honest ways of
hurting someone.

~~~
perl4ever
The way I see it, telling a "harmless" or "justified" lie can destroy trust,
which can have substantial or even devastating consequences. Often one faces
several choices, all of which _may_ hurt people, and moral rules are a
heuristic method by which people avoid the harmful effects of cognitive biases
due to self-interest or logical errors.

None of this should suggest I think it's obviously wrong to lie to a stranger
about whether you're deaf in order to avoid a conversation - that might be
permissible according to generally accepted social rules. My point is more
that when you start talking about deciding _for yourself_ when to obey moral
rules, you are on shaky ground, no matter how wise or logical you are.

------
adrr
This was already required in the Visa Merchant agreement. If you signed up
online. The merchant must provide an online way to cancel which could be
email, webpage or chat. If they don't just call up your card issuer and file a
"canceled recurring" dispute as the merchant doesn't provide a visa acceptable
way to cancel the subscription.

[https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/about-
visa/15-April-2...](https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/about-
visa/15-April-2015-Visa-Rules-Public.pdf)

Section: 5.9.8.2

~~~
khc
so the solution to having to call a merchant to cancel a subscription is to
call your card issuer to cancel a subscription?

~~~
adrr
My bank doesn't make me sit on hold for 20 minutes and isn't staffed by min
wage employees who are incentivized to retain you including lying to you or
hanging up on you. I don't blame the employees, they are just trying to make
rent.

Also chargebacks penalize the merchants both in fines/fees but if they rack of
enough, they'll pay higher processing fees.

~~~
kchoudhu
> My bank doesn't make me sit on hold for 20 minutes and isn't staffed by min
> wage employees

Lucky you.

~~~
dionidium
There are literally thousands of banks and credit unions in the United States.
If your bank sucks, then you have no reason not to take your business to a
different one.

Banks seem to occupy a weird space in the minds of consumers. You can open as
many accounts as you want at as many banks as you want. If you're paying fees,
switch to a bank that doesn't have those fees. If you can't get somebody on
the phone, switch to a bank that staffs its call centers. If their website
sucks, switch to a bank with a good website.

Try a few out. See what you like. It's just like any other consumer product.

------
danso
I recently had to cancel an ongoing subscription I had with Equifax, which
requires you to call by phone. Unbelievably frustrating. I had to dial the
service at least 10 times. Each time, the automated responder would make me go
through a very slow menu selection process, only to randomly fail to
acknowledge either my correct SSN or zipcode or street number, which I entered
using a keypad. As a consumer, I've had to enter info via phone keypad for as
long as I can remember, and I've never run into a system (not even small local
businesses) that was so randomly buggy.

I thought maybe I had the wrong phone number for cancellation. Turns out, when
you google "cancel Equifax phone number", there are several phone numbers
listed by Equifax itself, on various sections of its "help" pages.

Took me about half an hour to finally reach a human operator. Surprisingly,
the cancellation process was quick with her with no haggling. But I imagine
the process is so frustrating overall that a good number of people just give
up.

~~~
fishbone
Please listen closely, our menu options have changed

~~~
mistermann
We are experiencing higher than normal call volume.

Every. Single. Day.

I would like to give executives the option to stop this or go to prison for
this never ending nonsense. I think most would choose to stop.

~~~
yellowapple
Relatedly, I've been flying a lot more than usual in the last couple of
months.

Every single flight, the boarding announcements start with something along the
lines of "this plane is going to be more full than usual, so we're going to
need to check some of your carry-ons".

Well guess what, United? Maybe if you didn't cram passengers into the fuselage
like sardines in a goddamn tin can, you'd have enough room for everyone's
carry-on luggage in the bins.

~~~
briankelly
I've learned that storage is rarely the issue - they do this to reduce
boarding time to stay on schedule. I often board later in the line and there
is still plenty of space. Really they should just ban carry-on rollers for
non-elderly, able people, they're the ones people spend ages trying to jam in.

~~~
Sohcahtoa82
> Really they should just ban carry-on rollers for non-elderly, able people,
> they're the ones people spend ages trying to jam in.

I would agree, but they charge for checked bags.

------
FidelCashflow
I pay for recurring stuff with a CC for this very reason. I had an insurance
company refuse to cancel my insurance unless I physically came into their
office all the way across town (would have been about two hours of my time
when it was all said and done) to show them proof that I had insurance through
another agency. I declined that request and explained that they simply weren't
getting paid any more. I called the number on my card and explained the
situation to them and that I told them to stop billing me and they refused.
The rep noted this issue on the account. Sure enough, they didn't stop billing
me. I called the card company again to report that the insurance company had
billed me again. They immediately reversed the charges and blocked all further
charges from the company.

The insurance agent reported me to DMV (the relationship had soured pretty
badly before this all happened) for not having insurance. It was a 2 minute
call to my new insurance agent to let them to know to send proof of coverage
to DMV. Problem solved in ~10 minutes of my time instead of 2 hours.

~~~
bruxis
I don't have enough exposure to the product (not available in my region) but I
really liked the _idea_ of privacy.com where you can create a credit card
proxy for every subscription you have.

This seems extremely valuable for managing subscriptions, tracking your funds,
and of course, some modicum of privacy where your original credit card is only
shared with one party.

edit: Seems like privacy.com is a direct-to-bank connection instead of
depending on a credit card for funding.

~~~
jhauris
CapitalOne offers the same service on their credit cards with a browser
plugin. It also disallows charges to the virtual card numbers from any source
other than the site it's associated with.

~~~
softawre
You can do this with (the awesome) Citi 2% cash back card as well, just use
their normal website to generate virtual numbers.

~~~
gnicholas
Yeah I only wish it was supported in the mobile app also!

------
jedberg
One of the philosophies at Netflix was that it should be as easy to cancel as
it is to sign up, because you should respect your customers enough not to
annoy them into keeping your service.

Honestly, it always seemed to me that it was actually easier to cancel than
the sign up.

~~~
adrr
Any company that generates value for a customer doesn't have retention issues.
I used to run software engineering at two subscription commerce companies. One
company allowed users to cancel and pause/skip online via webpage, chat, email
and even social channels. The other forced customers to call up support to
cancel. The first company sold for 10 figures, the other company just did a
down round and layoffs. Screwing over customers is good for short-term gain,
but eventually, you run out of new customers and you burned the bridge for re-
aquiring former customers.

~~~
Matt3o12_
This is unfortunately only true in a competitive environment for non essential
goods. If you provide services such as internet, or telephone where people can
only choose between one or two providers, which are all equally bad, the
customers don’t have a choice.

And then there are services where people sign up but only a very small
percentage would voluntarily come back no matter how good or bad your service
is because they sign up out of impulse. Gyms are good examples for those —
people sign up because they want to lose weight/stay fitter, etc but only a
small percentage actually goes there after the first few times. This of course
sucks for the regular customers who want to pause their membership because
they are too busy for a few months or move, etc (but on the other hand, those
no-goes also subsidies the regular goers because the gym can offer a lower
price for everyone).

For those companies, we need laws that make it equally as easy to cancel as to
sign up.

~~~
mgkimsal
>This of course sucks for the regular customers who want to pause their
membership because they are too busy for a few months or move

Yeah, I'd wanted to pause my gym membership for 3 months a couple years back
because I was going to be traveling a lot, and wasn't going to be in town.
Only option was to cancel, then pay a new "processing fee" to start again
months later. Really pissed me off. I'd been a member for 2 years at that
point, using regularly. no exceptions to their policy. i left. i _did_ go back
a couple years later, when they had a 'sign up and we waive the processing
fee!' promotion (closest/best combination of pool/gym - everything else is
miles further). They'd have had my monthly money for another couple years with
minimal use by me during that time, save for a stupid policy that "we can't
change". ugh...

------
wittjeff
I've only used this a couple of times but I think it works: "I'd like to
cancel my service. I'm going to say this really clearly for the recording, in
case I have to subpoena this for evidence. I want to cancel my service,
effective [date]. When I hang up this phone, I want there to be no financial
relationship between myself and your company of any kind. None. I don't want
any further communication from you other than a final statement showing a zero
balance due. Now we can make this call as long as you'd like. No. Financial.
Relationship. We're done." Then go silent, and if they try to pitch you any
products of any kind, interrupt and ask "Are you refusing to cancel my
service? Speak clearly for the recording."

~~~
mltony
But recording phone conversations is illegal in most states, so unless you
live in a state where it's legal, they might know that you are bluffing.

~~~
wittjeff
In some states only one party needs to know about the recording. In some state
all parties need to know about it. If you tell them up front, they can refuse,
but then it's just evidence that they're being difficult.

Certain keywords like "lawsuit" can break the strictly regimented conversation
tree too.

~~~
Karunamon
Be a bit careful with the "l" word - many companies instruct their reps to
immediately stop dealing with people that threaten legal proceedings over the
phone and tell them to contact the company attorneys.

Remember that any company that doesn't empower the phone support people to
help you probably didn't empower them enough to go off-script.

~~~
xur17
If I can contact the company attorneys via email, that would be preferred
anyways.

~~~
maccard
Surely you don't want to speak to a company's attorney to cancel your gym
membership, or to dispute a $5 purchase. I worked in retail, and people would
threaten court over 10-20 euro purchases. We would immediately end the
discussion, record their details and pass them on to our lawyers who would
contact them within a few days, and presumably begin some arduous process.

If you had just been polite to me on the phone, I probably could have fixed
your issue in 15 minutes.

------
aphextron
Honestly, the best way to handle these things is to forget even bothering with
the company and file a charge-back with your bank or Visa/Mastercard. You have
every right to call up your bank and deny a charge for a service you're not
using, and didn't ask to renew.

Plus it's guaranteed to get the charge removed immediately, and you'll be
hurting the company by adding to their charge-back tally, increasing payment
processing costs for them and potentially completely cutting them off.

~~~
Matheus28
I wouldn't advise telling people to do chargebacks often. They're meant to be
used when venues of negotiation with the company are exhausted and you still
believe they're in the wrong. If your bank suspects you're being too liberal
with them, they will cut you off, as they'll suspect you're the fraudster.

~~~
naibafo
I mean how often do you have to cancel gym memberships and newspapers?

------
Waterluvian
My trick to avoid the long retentions go around is to tell them I'm leaving
their service area.

Why are you looking to cancel your phone plan?

Leaving the country.

They know they can't win me over and so they don't even try.

~~~
brandonbloom
I've done this several times with Comcast, but it failed with Time Warner when
I moved out of NYC. They demand to know why you are canceling and have some
sort of way to extract money out of you for every scenario, including moving
out of their service area. In that case, they transfer you to another phone
system that helps you find a provider at your new address and, presumably,
nets them a referral fee of some kind. Meanwhile, if you try any excuse to
quit that they haven't accounted for, they tell you "yes sir" and redirect
your call to that service as a fallback catch-all. Truly despicable.

~~~
cm2187
Has anyone tried "none of your business" as an answer to why your are leaving?

~~~
craftyguy
Seriously. And if that doesn't work, try "I hate you"

~~~
nostrademons
My dad used to use "I'm unemployed and have no money" on telemarketers, with
some success.

Though nowadays, in the era of pervasive financing and Wall Street investors
that care more about revenue than cash flow, I wonder if that would even work.
Maybe "I'm being investigated by the Feds and all of my financial
relationships are considered suspect, and so would prefer to have as few of
them as possible"?

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _My dad used to use "I'm unemployed and have no money" on telemarketers,
> with some success._

I've tried telling the truth, I've tried assertively stating I'm not
interested, I've tried so many things...

...at this point, when I pick up a call, I wait for the other side to
introduce themselves, and if they call with an unsolicited offer, I just hang
up without saying anything. Am I a bad person?

~~~
craftyguy
Not at all. My current method is to block all numbers not in my contact list..
if they are important, they'll leave a voicemail. Works surprisingly well,
actually.

~~~
cm2187
Effectively the phone equivalent of grey listing for emails.

------
flyGuyOnTheSly
Thank god for that.

I made the mistake of joining a Goodlife gym in Canada many moons ago...

The place was disgusting. Always crowded. Mould growing in the bathrooms.
Stunk very badly, etc...

So I stopped going regularly... and one day I was in the area I decided to
stop in and cancel my membership.

"Oh sorry, you'll need to make an appointment with management in order to
cancel."

"OK, is a manager in right now?"

"Yes, the manager is in but I was told not to disturb her right now."

"OK, well can you tell her a customer is waiting paitiently to cancel his
account?"

"No, sorry, I am not allowed to disturb her. You're going to need to make an
appointment and come back."

So I did that...

And about 3 weeks later I went in at the agreed upon time to cancel my
subscription and I was just sitting... waiting... for over 1 hour...

Right beside a poor old lady that was trying to cancel her subscription as
well!!!

She was overly polite and was dealing with this overagressive meathead trying
to keep her locked into the service...

"I hate coming here... I never come... I never should have signed up... I just
want to cancel..."

"But do you have any friends that might want to take on your subscription?
It's at a discounted rate and you might be able to help them out by
transferring it over to them."

"No, I do know know anyone who wants to come here."

"Ok, let me go talk to my manager about this."

And he left for like 20 minutes and came back and gave her the gears again.

When my turn came... I just said "I'm moving to england and I don't know a
single person here who might want to absorb my contract".

It was a total lie... but it was the only answer that would get me out of
there in under 10 minutes.

Companies abusing politeness really are terrible to society.

~~~
pandler
> When my turn came... I just said "I'm moving to england and I don't know a
> single person here who might want to absorb my contract".

I actually came here to say the same thing. I realized “I’m moving” was the
best way to get results in these situations when I was actually moving out of
the country for a bit. It’s like a magical incantation that immediately gets
them to stop trying to upsell or retain you, no questions asked.

~~~
joering2
Recent renewal contract for LA Fitness has this cover. If you moving away you
have to provide some sort of a proof, like new lease contract, job letter etc
so that they still will try to find the gym within 15 miles and move you over.
I was told in LA Fitness you cannot cancel without any sort of proof if you
want to use "moving away" as a reason.

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
>If you moving away you have to provide some sort of a proof, like new lease
contract, job letter etc so that they still will try to find the gym within 15
miles and move you over.

Just tell them you're moving to another continent then... or Antarctica!

~~~
paxys
Or, like, don't sign a long term contract at all. It's pretty easy to find an
affordable monthly gym which has all the basics pretty much everywhere.

------
leekyle333
The New York Times doesn't allow you to cancel your subscription online.

~~~
sequoia
Not only do they not allow you to cancel online, they autorenew your annual
subscription to the tune of HUNDREDS of dollars. This happened to me and I'm
certain I didn't explicitly opt-in to autorenewal, as I would never
consciously opt-in to autorenewal of such a costly service. The told me the
following: "by choosing to pay by credit card, you opted into autorenewal."
!!??

I moved out out of the country, they autorenewed, I called them, and they
refused to cancel the rest of my year's subscription! They insisted upon
continuing to send papers to my old address for an entire year.

Completely scammy, I will never do business with them again.

~~~
ouid
you should issue a chargeback.

------
btrettel
There have been a few times where I didn't sign up for a service because I
anticipated cancelling would be a pain. The fact that trials often autorenew
makes me reluctant to even do a trial. I wonder how much business is lost this
way vs. how much is gained from making cancelling hard.

~~~
VLM
Cable TV is a classic example. If you ask how much it'll cost after the
promotion ends, they'll go on repeat, "It'll be $20 for the first three
months".

------
cj0011001
There's this company that offers internet service on flights also claims to
offer secure hotspots, (it's a gimmick) around cities all over the US they're
based in Los Angeles: Boingo Wireless. The only way to cancel the service is
to call in, that's their whole scheme. When you call in they treat that as if
you were doing something extremely complicated and that takes time. One of the
customer service representative told me that he would have to contact the
engineering department to cancel my account...Like that would be necessary. I
was getting impatient, on the phone for about 40 minutes. This new law will be
the end of them.

------
martinpw
I canceled my LA Times subscription online last week. The website says you
have to call to cancel. I thought I'd just give it a try online, fully
expecting to fail, but to my surprise it all went through easily. They asked
for the reason, and when I gave it (excessive ads+tracking) they canceled.

------
hoveringcto
Simply telling the merchant I will do a chargeback has worked every time for
me (provided it's a credit card charge).

~~~
toomuchtodo
Some merchants have it in their contract (for subscriptions) that any
chargebacks will go to a collection agency, which dings your credit.

~~~
jkaplowitz
It's probably disputable as in violation of their merchant agreement, but yeah
most people will just suffer under the consequences instead of pushing back.

~~~
toomuchtodo
“However that doesn’t stop them from trying to collect payment directly from
consumers. A review of some merchant agreements found online were silent on
the issue of whether they can subsequently try to collect from consumers. And
when we asked the major card companies whether their merchant agreements
restrict this practice, only American Express responded, saying in an email
that, “American Express has an established charge dispute process in place
that takes into account both the Card Member and the merchant perspectives.
Our policies do not prohibit a merchant from seeking to collect payment from a
Card Member for a transaction that is charged back to a merchant.”

[http://blog.credit.com/2015/06/think-you-won-your-credit-
car...](http://blog.credit.com/2015/06/think-you-won-your-credit-card-dispute-
not-so-fast-118101/)

~~~
jkaplowitz
Interesting. I guess it doesn't violate the merchant agreement...

...which makes sense in that a valid debt can't be invalidated by a
chargeback. But it doesn't turn an invalid debt into a valid one either.

And if you have a contract that you cancel in accordance with the contract
(e.g. making the required request to the required phone number then limiting
your call to a reasonable duration after doing so), charging back charges for
periods after your payment obligation ends shouldn't give them a valid basis
to send you to collections, contract or no contract.

They would be unable to prove a valid debt in that case, so a dispute with the
debt collector and/or credit bureaus would get it off your credit.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Yes, if he merchant is not operating in good faith, it’s easy to outmaneuver
their collections efforts provided you’ve kept good documentation.

If they are operating in good faith, and your chargeback is not legitimate,
expect a blemish on your credit until you settle the debt (if sent to
collections).

~~~
jkaplowitz
Yup. And a smaller blemish even once paid, for something like 7 to 10 years
after that. (That's the retention period for collections information on credit
reports.)

------
salehhamadeh
Last week I spent 1 hour and 20 minutes waiting for a Zipcar rep to answer my
call. Creating my account was as simple as taking a photo of my license within
the app and getting into a car. Companies that make signing up easy and
cancellation difficult are the worst.

------
rdiddly
OK now here's an excellent use for Google Duplex. Using a robot to fool a
person: annoying. Using a robot to fool someone annoying: fine!

~~~
bb88
Google has since changed this. Google Duplex will not "fool" humans any more.
They announce that they're the "Google Assistant" calling on behalf of a
customer.

I think unfortunately what will happen is that people will just hang up on the
google assistant because it's not a real human.

It'll be kind of like what happened to the "glassholes". Maybe not as mean
though.

~~~
jake_the_third
Why? If I were a business that took phone orders, why would I care what's on
the other end?

As long as it's reliable and intelligent enough, I don't think people will
mind. I know I wouldn't.

~~~
s73v3r_
Because you want to make it difficult for customers to cancel.

~~~
jake_the_third
> Because you want to make it difficult for customers to cancel.

Explain to me, in detail, how you arrived to this conclusion from my previous
statement. If anything, a business accepting robocalls from customers would
make canceling easier.

I await your explanation, s73v3r_.

~~~
s73v3r_
Which is why you, as a business, would not accept those robocalls.

~~~
jake_the_third
If I was a scummy business, sure but you're omitting the other side of the
coin: making it easier for customers to do reservations. I still think that
businesses would welcome robocall reservations (if they're reliable and
efficient) just as they have the internet.

------
hermitdev
While I like the spirit of this law (rare for me with CA laws), I expect it to
be ruled unconstitutional as attempting to regulate interstate commerce, whose
so jurisdiction is under US Congress.

~~~
gshulegaard
Not sure it would hold up in the Supreme Court. Provided the law is worded
strictly to apply to CA citizens / only when corporations are serving CA
citizens there is little to make an interstate regulation argument on. And
there is also international precedence (EU GDPR) which could guide court
opinion.

Maybe it's just wishful thinking but that's my $0.02.

~~~
briandear
GDPR isn't a relevant precedent as there isn't a precedent -- GDPR hasn't been
challenged in court, not the least, a US court.

GDPR also has no relevance for US interstate commerce.

South Dakota vs. Wayfair overturned the Quill decision, and, the Quill
decision would have been the controlling precedent in any constitutional
challenge, based on physical nexus. However, that all changed with Wayfair.

One of the key arguments in the overturn of Quill were that Quill created,
rather than resolved market distortions. Essentially, Quill (according to the
ruling in SD v Wayfair,) created a tax shelter for businesses that limit their
physical presence in a state. The problem with Quill is that it disadvantaged
economically identical actors for arbitrary reasons -- a small shop with a few
items in a warehouse in a state would have to pay taxes on everything they
sold in the state, while a large business (such as Wayfair) with no physical
presence in the state would be advantaged by not having to charge a tax on the
exact same items. Helping customers evade a lawful tax unfairly shifts an
increased share of the taxes to those consumers who buy from competitors with
a physical presence in the State.

"Quill’s physical presence rule has limited States’ ability to seek long-term
prosperity and has prevented market participants from competing on an even
playing field."

So now, we look at the California law requiring online cancellations. It would
be an extremely difficult argument to cite SD vs. Wayfair since the online
cancellation requirement isn't creating a disadvantage on market participants
or the states themselves. Lost economic development due to the imbalance
created by Quill was cited repeatedly as a flaw in Quill. An online
cancellation requirement is going to be very difficult to prove as having a
deleterious effect on economic activity/growth/development as was clearly
demonstrated in the majority opinion for Wayfair. Wayfair was essentially
about tax shelters. The California law doesn't correct any particular economic
harm.

However, that being said, any constitutional challenge to the California Law
would likely fall short because the Supreme Court interpretation of the
Commerce Clause essentially says that laws ought not present an "undue burden"
on interstate trade. Allowing for online cancellation, would be, to say the
least, a stretch to argue that it places an undue burden on doing business
with people within the state. That's why, if this law were to go to court, it
would be upheld since someone like the New York Times would have a hard time
proving an "undue burden." Ironically (to me,) being required to collect sales
tax in all 50 states as well as the thousands of individual jurisdictions
(including multiple jurisdictions even within cities, thanks to economic
reinvestment zones) -- that to me, seems like a massively undue burden.
However, as the court rules in Wayfair, that burden is less important than the
economic discrimination that was happening (i.e. a local online shop vs. an
out of state online shop being burdened unequally despite selling the exact
same product.)

As an aside, I might argue that a business without a physical presence in the
state isn't availing themselves to the infrastructure or public services of
that state, however they are being asked to pay for those infrastructure and
services. Shipping companies actually do the deliveries and they, of course,
are paying the taxes for their locality. But that's another debate.
Incidentally, justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer joined Roberts's Wayfair
dissent, in which he stated that Congress ought to be making the laws and not
the courts. I never thought I'd agree with Kagan and Sotomayor on anything,
but it is strange times in which we live.

In anyone's interested, Ginsburg, Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, Kennedy were in the
majority on the Wayfair case while Breyer, Sotomayor, Roberts and Kagan were
in the dissent. [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/south-dakota-v-
wa...](http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/south-dakota-v-wayfair-inc/)

It was a 5-4 but not how you would have expected!

Anyway, to the point, Quill would have made a challenge to the California law
rather easy, but now, the California law will likely pass a Constitutional
challenge based on the "undue burden" test established by the courts.

~~~
gshulegaard
This is a very detailed response! I appreciate your attention detail, but I
did want to address initial comment reading my comment as proposing GDPR as
legal precedence.

I never intended to forward the notion that the GDPR would serve as
precedence. Indeed in a judicial context "precedence" has a very specific
meaning and a piece of legislature from an international body of government
would not be considered legal precedence in a U.S. court. I chose the phrasing
"guide court opinion" carefully to specifically avoid confusion with the legal
meaning of the term.

I agree with your analysis of SD v. Wayfair in that this is not likely a piece
of legislation that would make it to the Supreme Court on interstate commerce
grounds (at least in a post-Quill world). But _if_ it did I would speculate
the argument would center around the need for online firms to alter their
behavior in other States as a result of the California law. To which I made
the leap to suggest that the GDPR, as a current event, and it's affect on
altering firms behavior even outside of the EU would be something that would
likely be referenced in a Court opinion. Although, if you wanted to find an
example limited to the US, you could also refer to the current status of EPA
car emission regulations to demonstrate a similar single state regulation
altering firm behavior across state lines without running afoul of interstate
commerce.

But at the end of the day you and I are in agreement, this would not have much
of an interstate commerce leg to stand on.

P.S. For those interested in the South Dakota vs. Wayfair opinion here is a
link:

[https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf)

I found it interesting like /u/briandear and it is especially relevant for the
tech sector.

------
codedokode
Recurring payments are implemented in the worst way possible. You cannot see a
list of your subscriptions online, cannot see how much you have spent, cannot
stop or cancel them. And even if you don't use some service anymore, they
still can charge you. That is because systems like Visa earn money only when
you spend and have no motivation to make cancelling easier.

~~~
paulddraper
That's why you need a virtual credit card solution.

------
downandout
Why not just use Privacy [1] when you sign up? It allows you to generate
virtual cards on a per-merchant basis anytime you want. You can simply shutoff
the card(s) when you want to cancel. No phone calls, emails, or faking
deafness required. I’ve been a big fan of it ever since I discovered them.

[1] [https://privacy.com](https://privacy.com)

------
rmc
The EU's new data privacy law (GDPR) allows you to withdraw consent, and "it
must be as easy to withdraw consent as to give it". A perfectly clear and
powerful way to describe what is wanted.

"It must be as easy to cancel a subscription as to subscribe" would a similar,
effective way to do it here.

------
dalbasal
There are some built in problems when it comes to this sort of regulator-esque
legislation.

If a company doesn't want to "do X," but is being forced to, the specific,
legalistically deconstructed definition of 'X' gets very important. On the
path between the kind of grand moral statements politicians trade in to the
way corporate lawyers use language... a lot gets lost

A common 'X' is " _inform customers of something_ ": pharmaceutical side
effects, the real interest rate on a loan, etc. This often leads to a cat and
mouse game, where companies "inform" customers by way of 10,000 word small
print documents they know no one reads. Then the regulator tries to stop it,
saying this information must be part of all advertising. Then we get verbal
small print. Etc.

This is why regulators exist, to play this cat and mouse game.

GDPR, cookie laws, and a lot of the laws which effectively govern business
have these issues. Our legislative/political system just doesn't deal with
this well. On one hand we have politics, that hates detail. On the other hand,
a legal bureaucracy that hates principle. It also doesn't care for economics
and isn't too worried about creating environments devoid of real competition,
which is an unwanted side effect of getting "regulatory."

In any case, the _real_ underlying problem here, IMO, is that 3rd parties
should not have this kind of control in their hands in the first place.

HNers will probably reach for blockchains and smart contracts, but this
_could_ be build into credit cards or any payment method. It doesn't really
matter.

Just put the ability to turn payments on/off in customer's hands. Send the
service a notice. Done. We've built up all these "convenient" ways for
customers to authorize repeat payment, without building in an off button. Now
they're regulating the use of them instead They should have an off button.
That's it.

~~~
claudius
Alternatively, don’t force the company to accept/deny specific forms of
communication; simply make it clear that any communication is sufficient to
cancel a contract.

There’s no point for a company to build a convoluted website if any customer
knows they can send an email to info@example.com or a direct message or a text
"I cancel my contract with you, my account number is 1234." and the only claim
the company could make to counter that is that it didn’t receive the
e-mail/message. Not that it’s internal processes didn’t allow for the message
to be received, but that its infrastructure never actually received it (in
which case the user would have received an email bounce message). To be nice,
request the company to acknowledge receipt of the notification and, if not
received, repeat on multiple channels (including certified snail mail).

Oh, and make it illegal to hide surprising bits in terms and conditions due to
the information asymmetry typically accompanying those :)

~~~
dalbasal
This is probably the type of suggection a regulatory "hawk" would make.
Essentially, make your next cat-and-mouse move big. "Lets see you get around
that one, industry.!"

They see how easy/optimized subscriptions are, and how hard/optimized
cancellations are. They see the regulatory cat-and-mouse game. Conclude that
"industry" is acting in bad faith, and suggest an FU rule like that.

Industry will respond (correctly) that this kind of a proposal puts a big
burden on them, and makes managing subscriptions very hard and expensive.

I think it's a bad idea for the same reason you can't stop hyperinflation by
yelling at retailers to stop their "greedy price gouging." Swimming directly
into a persistant economic incentives current is hard. "Complying" becomes
implementing the minimum standard which is still legal.

A better approach (IMO, I am not a policy maker) would be to (1) recognize the
major economic incentives (2) avoid leaving low level decision making
(implementation) in the hands of those whose economic incentives are opposed
to your goals. (3) if you absolutely must force companies to act against their
own interest, be extremely prescriptive. Leave nothing open ended and do as
little of this as possible.

In this case, I don't think it's that hard. Regulate payment providers,
particularly CCs. They already have a regulator, so no structural changes (or
even legislation, possibly) is necessary.

(1) Make subscriptions an explicit type of thing. (2) Enforce a minimum amount
of information that the payment provider must receive, in order to honour the
subscription. (3) display this information to customers. Monthly paper
statements are fine. (4) Enforce a standard whereby consumers can cancel
recurring payments by contacting the payment provider.

A credit card service, bank, bitcoin wallet or whatever has no incentive to
make cancelations clunky. Simply putting the onus on them is probably
sufficient regulation. The better ones will probably give you a nice app/web
view with extra user friendly features the regulator never even thought of.
For example, they might alert you when "introductory price" periods end or
keep track of "minimum durations" to let you know when your contract expires.

A have a similar view on cookie laws & parts of GDPR. Instead of leaving
everything up to websites (who have an incentive to make you give up all your
rights), regulate the data browsers & ISPs share with a website. They're not
as vested in minimizing user rights.

------
humanfromearth
I'm not sure there is a requirement to cancel subscriptions online as the
article suggests. From the bill itself
([https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB313)):

> (b) A business that makes an automatic renewal offer or continuous service
> offer shall provide a toll-free telephone number, electronic mail address, a
> postal address if the seller directly bills the consumer, or it shall
> provide another cost-effective, timely, and easy-to-use mechanism for
> cancellation that shall be described in the acknowledgment specified in
> paragraph (3) of subdivision (a).

I'm not a lawyer of course.

~~~
psetq
IANAL, but just after that:

    
    
        17602...
        (c) In addition to the requirements of subdivision (b), a consumer who accepts
        an automatic renewal or continuous service offer online shall be allowed to
        terminate the automatic renewal or continuous service exclusively online, which
        may include a termination email formatted and provided by the business that
        a consumer can send to the business without additional information.
    

though it seems to only apply if the agreement was made online.

------
gwbas1c
I can't begin to describe the number of companies that set me up for auto-
renewal without any form of billing or invoice.

------
rubicon33
I run a software business myself here in CA, and allowing users to manage
their subscription easily was one of my first priorities. Nothing frustrates
me more than companies that make this process difficult. If a user doesn't
like your service and wants to cancel, they deserve an easy in-app/in-web
experience to do it.

------
jchw
Cancelling by phone sound bad? Planet Fitness will only let you cancel in
person or by certified mail. I moved to California recently, and I still had a
Planet Fitness subscription (it was the closest gym to me and it was open
24/7, I won't be doing it again) and now I'm curious if I can use this against
them.

~~~
dawnerd
They'll likely find some loophole around not calling it a subscription.
"You're timesharing with our gyms"

~~~
FireBeyond
They already do. It's not a subscription, it's a membership.

LA Fitness is another that lets you sign up online, and cancel only via
certified mail.

~~~
djsumdog
At least with LA Fitness, I said I wanted to cancel and the guy at the desk
printed out the letter for me. It was pretty low hassle. There are other gyms
that make it a more insane process.

------
sgustard
Tivo, based in California, is clearly in violation.

[https://www.tivo.com/contact-us](https://www.tivo.com/contact-us)

"Please note: At this time, it is not possible to use chat to cancel" ... and
same for email, leaving phone as the only option.

------
maxxxxx
Very good! Businesses always say they focus on the customer but part of that
is also to allow the customer to get rid of them. I still remember the
impossibility of cancelling AOL. I had to do chargebacks on my amex for a few
months until they got the message.

------
TomK32
We europeans better block every access from California due to this
overreaching undemocratic GDPR style law. /s

~~~
subroutine
European law is years beyond this. Consumer laws in some EU countries
stipulate that a person can cancel a subscription simply by vocalizing this
intention out their front door between the hours of 9am-3pm. "Heyy, I'm
cancelling."

~~~
DavideNL
Hah, nice one.

Where i live (The Netherlands, Europe) you are allowed by law to cancel
subscriptions in the same way you signed up. That seems fair... so if you sign
up via internet then you can cancel via internet. No more cancel-bullying.

------
docker_up
Ring (the video doorbell) is exactly like this and I haven't gotten rid of my
subscription because I keep forgetting and their hours are like 9 to 5pm.
Hopefully this changes so that I can get rid of that crap.

~~~
dv_dt
I'm sorry, maybe it's my IoT-get-off-my-network/lawn hackles being raised
here, but why does your doorbell need a subscription in the first place?

~~~
Skunkleton
Basically because of NAT. Because the devices on your network can't all have
public IP addressed, you have to have them all connect to a central public
server. Public servers cost money->ring costs money.

Of course the reason things are architected this way is so that more people
can make money...

~~~
ddoolin
Can this be solved by using IPv6 and addressing everything publicly?

~~~
Skunkleton
Probably not:

1\. NAT provides a basic level of security for your network. The same could be
achieved with a firewall, but it isnt the norm.

2\. Even without nat, there would still have to be _some_ computer that does
the processing on the raw data from the IoT device. There is no reason that
couldnt be your PC or Phone, but the precedent has been set that these tasks
are performed on a managed device in the "cloud".

3\. The companies involved will make less money.

A better solution would be to have an IoT gateway device publicly accessible
that proxies access to the individual IoT devices. This would create a better
security story. If this device were standards based, then each IoT vendor
could integrate with it, and router vendors could add the capability to their
devices. Of course there is no financial incentive for things to work this
way.

I guess I only bring up NAT because it is yet another example of the "server"
lie. There is no such thing as a computer that is a "server". Programs act as
servers. Computers might be "server-class", but all that means is that they
are high quality. Driving a wedge between "servers" and normal PCs just pushes
more control out of individual's hands.

~~~
Spivak
1\. It would be the norm with an IPv6 gateway. It's not like it takes anything
special to replace NAT with a firewall: allow outbound, allow
established/related inbound, and replace port forwarding in the UX with allow
rules for (host, port).

2\. No argument, does seem odd that it wouldn't be the app though. Figure a
door bell wouldn't be all that intensive.

3\. Yeah, recurring revenue is pretty much the gold standard.

A device that stands between your device and the public internet, provides
security and access control, and is standards based... so a perimeter
firewall? But with an API to allow internal devices to punch their own holes.
Ehh don't get me wrong I like the spirit, but that would immediately get used
by malware.

------
kelukelugames
I wish this applied to banks too.

I tried to pay off my mortgage this week and I had to go to a physical bank
and handle them a check for seven hundred dollars. So stupid.

~~~
slezakattack
I had one of those 80-10-10 mortgages and was trying to pay off the 2nd
mortgage. Had to go in person, give them a check, and then had to HANDWRITE A
LETTER to be sent to corporate (I think?) saying that "yes, I really would
like to close out the account that held this mortgage". No template and a
"sign here" or anything. They just gave me printer paper and a "just write
something" attitude. It was a very odd experience as I wasn't sure how formal
it was suppose to be.

~~~
carapace
Reminds me of this arcane tidbit: you can write your own checks...

> you can write a “negotiable instrument,” bank talk for a valid check, on
> just about anything. According to the Uniform Commercial Code, the body of
> law that governs these things, all you have to include are the name of the
> payee, the dollar amount, the name of your bank, your signature, the date,
> and some suitable words of conveyance, such as “pay to the order of.” You
> don’t need the account number or the bank ID number you find on preprinted
> checks.

[https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/562/can-you-
write-...](https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/562/can-you-write-a-
check-on-any-old-piece-of-paper/)

------
joelhaasnoot
As a European, I ran into this with WSJ. Subscribing is easy and online,
cancelling is only by phone. Their Dutch access number didn't work either,
forcing me to use their international numbers at the cost of international
phone call.

------
cj0011001
There's this company that offers internet service on flights also claims to
offer secure hotspots, (it's a gimmick) around cities all over the US they're
based in Los Angeles: Boingo Wireless. The only way to cancel the service is
to call in, that's their whole scheme. When you they treat that as if you were
doing something extremely complicated and that takes time. One of the customer
service representative told me that he would have to contact the engineering
department to cancel my account...Like that would be necessary. I was getting
impatient, on the phone for about 40 minutes. This new law will be the end of
them.

~~~
cj0011001
[https://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/boingo-
wireless-c...](https://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/boingo-
wireless-c275982.html)

------
surfmike
I hope this forces the NYTimes to allow online cancellations too.

~~~
sequoia
Funny that NYT came up on two separate threads here. I know they made me go
through hell to cancel, sounds like I'm not the only one.

~~~
Macha
Media outlets in general. I know they make the argument about GDPR and ad
tracking that they need it because nobody pays for them, but maybe more people
would pay if it wasn't so foolish to trust them with your payment details.

------
ec109685
Another consumer first law I would like to see is that if a service detects
you haven’t used it in the previous period, they refund your subscription fee.

There is so much wasted money on zombie subscriptions that people forget
about.

~~~
Cyphase
I understand where you're coming from (though I would never legislate it), but
compare it to insurance. Should your car insurance company have to refund your
premiums if you don't "use" their service in some time period, i.e. you don't
file a claim? Should a life insurance company return all your premiums if you
don't die during the covered term? I'm going to say no. In the case of
insurance, you're paying for someone else to take on a risk that you either
can't afford to take on, or that it doesn't make financial sense for you to
take on. In the case of a streaming subscription (for example), you're paying
for the ability to, at any moment, start streaming whatever content the
service is making available. Even if you never use that ability within a given
month, you still had the option, and that's what you were paying for. In fact,
you could frame that this way: you're paying to remove the "risk" that you'll
want to stream something at some point and won't be able to because you don't
have an active subscription.

And on a more personal level, I don't understand why people can't just manage
their subscriptions better. Dark patterns that make canceling subscriptions
difficult are one thing, but if a service makes it easy for you to cancel, and
you just haven't done it, that's on you.

That said, if a service wants to refund subscribers for unused service
periods, that would be a great feature. Or, as a middle ground, send an email
saying, "You haven't logged in in X months; do you want to cancel your
subscription?" X could even be configurable, and cancellation could be
automatic, e.g. cancel the subscription if the user hasn't logged in for 3
months.

~~~
ec109685
The email with an easy action to take would be a good compromise.

Insurance’s value is that any moment they are willing to pay out.

With subscription services, if you only use them occasionally, the smart thing
is to let them expire and then resubscrive when you need their services.
However the hassle in subscribing and unsubscribing is too high to make
practical.

------
xmrsilentx
I've actually closed bank accounts to get away from subscription services. It
really is an outrage. What more should it take than telling them you don't
want to pay for their service anymore?

~~~
jjeaff
I've had a bank (Bank of America), tell me that the only way to stop a
recurring, fraudulent ACH charge was to close my account and open a different
one.

I did close the account, but saw no reason to reopen one with boa.

The kicker is that a few months later, I get a delinquent negative balance
notice from boa. The ACH charge had struck again. I called and asked how in
the world I could get an ACH charge on a closed account with $0 in it. The
agent said that the account will automatically reopen!!! anytime someone tries
to charge it.

They will also automatically charge you overdraft fees, and then an overdraft
fee when the overdraft fee bounces, and then a negative balance fee... and an
overdraft fee when that one hits.

Just telling the story gets my blood boiling again. Never ever deal with any
large corporation if you can help it.

------
Gruklair
Funny.. I actually had to call justfab.com today to cancel my wife’s account.
Took me one hour and three different people before they finally managed to
shut it down. First attempt they hung up on me when I told them she was a
mute. Second time I just told them it was none of their business why she
couldn’t talk on the phone. The account was registered with my credit card in
my name but they still wouldn’t let me cancel or even have my credit card
removed from the account. Shit company...

------
dawnerd
Frontier is like the easiest company to cancel with. I called and asked to
cancel and they didn't even bother with retentions.

Meanwhile stamps.com and SiriusXM were by far the two most difficult with
Terminix and ADT coming in a close third.

I usually just tell them I'll issue a chargeback if they bill again and that
USUALLY works. It's why now if I can I'll use paypal so I can just easily
cancel the payment plan. For stamps I had to have chase stop all payments to
them which seemed to eventually work.

------
Torai
It was about time. Anyway, the subscription model is kind of a shitty model
for things that are not like Netflix, Spotify or some good designed SaaS.

I mean all that entrepreneur wannabes that copy to "Box of X every month" or
"A simple SaaS that took me 5K to hire a freelance to do it but I have a
niche" model. Please forget about it. I just want a handful of good
subscription services in my life. Because I tend to forget I'm paying them.

------
tothrowaway
Another way to get out of subscriptions is to change your billing credit card
to one generated by a service like Privacy.com. Then just close the card out.

Some sites/services are getting more savvy about pre-paid cards though
(DigitalOcean won't accept one). I tried to use a burner card on a snail mail
advertisement offering a $50 gift card to sign up for a trial of a magazine
subscription. Didn't work.

~~~
gnicholas
Some cards also offer virtual card numbers, which you can put a time and
dollar limit on. I have a 2% back Citi card that happens to offer this handy
feature.

~~~
xirdstl
I have a Bank of America card with the same feature.

In some ways I’m glad it’s not more widely used, or merchants might start
banning the BINs the virtual cards use.

------
meitham
In the UK the easiest way is to just cancel your direct debit. This usually
promptd the business to cancel your membership and usually follows up with
some letters to demand extra payment. You could safely ignore these letters,
even if it comes from a credit collection agency, and the court will side with
you if you explain the complexity in getting out of these contracts.

------
scardine
Tried to cancel an Upwork account, a message said I should call a number in
USA. I called and a message told me I should call between x AM to y PM
business days.

It is somewhat expensive to call from Brazil just to hear a recorded message
saying the call was useless. In the end I was able to cancel using their web
chat. The experience just confirmed my opinion about the company.

------
dev_dull
I hate to say and use it, but my best tool in situations like this is
disposable credit card numbers via the privacy app. I make a best effort to
close the account, and if that doesn’t work I cancel the temporary credit card
I used to sign up for the service.

Make sure to get your cancelation attempt in writing (email, etc) because some
places will still try and collect.

------
gsich
You subscribe online - you can cancel online. Now replace "online" with any
other way you can make a contract.

------
tounu
As long as it's not a Spotify subscription :)

~~~
wepple
Spotify lost me as a customer when they forced me to use some ridiculous chat
to explain why I was cancelling my account.

I was actually cancelling to re-sign-up using a non-Facebook account as a paid
subscriber..

Add silly friction and you get -1 customer.

~~~
dizzant
When did this happen to you? I've been considering the same, but switching
accounts hasn't yet been worth the hassle.

~~~
jrowley
You should be able to just disconnect your facebook account, and login via
email, no?

~~~
wepple
You’d think so, right? Nope:

[https://community.spotify.com/t5/Accounts/Change-from-
Facebo...](https://community.spotify.com/t5/Accounts/Change-from-Facebook-
login-to-an-actual-spotify-account/td-p/53605)

------
turc1656
This is a good law, but I'm genuinely curious...is this really such an issue?
Personally, I can't remember the last time (maybe ever?) having this issue.
Maybe I don't have a lot of subscriptions. Maybe I don't cancel often. Maybe I
come off on the phone as not budging an inch. The last time I recall having
even the slightest bit of an issue was cancelling my AOL service ~18 years ago
and even that wasn't as bad as everyone made it out to be.

Are the individual experiences shared in the article (and here in the
comments) exceptions or the norm? Even cancelling my last gym membership was a
breeze.

~~~
always_good
I once hornily punched my credit card number into a camsite to get "200 free
coins". After using them all (I gave them all to one cam girl after feeling
bad for her), I tried canceling the subscription.

The <form> around the <button>cancel</button> was literally commented out in
the html.

I forgot about it, got charged 2 weeks later, and issued a chargeback. Never
got charged again.

~~~
joering2
Watch out your credit score for a few months now. Some online merchants in CNP
environment have power to put a negative remark on your credit if your credit
card processor (Visa/MC/etc) deems they have higher trustworth score than you
do. I seen it happening to people. Your score will not go down,; however there
will be derogatory flag that could make it harder for you to get new credit
card, etc. I seen those on peoples files for up to 18 months, and then gone.

Edit: here is the phrase that may show up on your credit report: "Account
information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements"

------
shinymoon
Wow, just the right article at the right time: today after seeing SiriusXM
charges of ~ $20 monthly for subscription, to my huge surprise, I searched for
online cancellation, only to find none exists. I called them to cancel and
indeed ended up not canceling, rather getting a promo deal. I really love
SiriusXM while driving, but that lack of online cancellation completely
annoyed me.

------
paulie_a
I've found simply emailing them and asking for a call back to be surprisingly
effective, or I in a few cases i stop paying them by changing the billing to a
card that is about to expire. And if necessary the phrase "I will be
contacting my state attorney general's office, consumer fraud division, what
was your name again?" is the atomic bomb in getting things resolved.

------
gesman
WSJ is notorious for "you have to call us to cancel".

However I bypassed this by subscribing with amazon where i can cancel
subscription online.

~~~
MrMorden
I canceled my local newspaper subscription (had to repeat "cancel the account"
a dozen times whenever the CSR started speaking until they figured it out),
subscribed through Google Play, and took 2/3 off the monthly cost.

------
duxup
I hate calling and going through the hoops and even then what proof do you
have you cancelled?

I called a place recently and asked to cancel, first question was.

"Did you read the cancellation date!?!"

Yeah I did and I know you aren't because you didn't even ask my name yet...

So they look it up and ask again what I want, I tell them to cancel it
again....

"Ok I updated it"

Damn it....word game city population me.

------
daveheq
If you registered online or are getting emails, you should be able to
unregister online or through email. Period.

------
coding123
This is how the internet will get better as a hole. There's no way for
companies to track lots of different states requirements, so they implement
all the requirements for all the states (and EU). I hope that more small
states create laws with giant consequences.

------
thelastidiot
This would have been a welcome change when I tried to break my marriage with
Verizon. 3 phone calls later and 2 months passed they were still charging me
for the my cell phone service and it took repetitive attempts to straighten
things up. Bastards!

------
pbarnes_1
Woohooooo, I hope this means I can cancel my Morningstar sub. They make it
impossible.

------
intrasight
I've never been confronted with the "can't cancel service hell" but clearly it
must be a problem if CA passed this law. I don't have cable TV. Where else
besides cable does one experience this?

~~~
here-for-karma
Gym memberships are particularly terrible at this in my experience

~~~
intrasight
That was indeed that last one where doing a cancel was "involved". But it only
involved sending a letter by certified mail, and all the info/details were on
their web site.

------
JTbane
I agree with this law, as many of these sort of services are very difficult to
cancel. Many gyms require "certified mail" stating you wish to cancel the
renewal of your contract.

------
EastSmith
Great. Pining users a week before an yearly renew would be nice law too.

------
maelito
I've spent 4 months to find a way to cancel my complementary health insurance
in France. They were sending me letters with 2 weeks delay asking me for other
documents.

------
oytis
I wish that Germany had such law. Self-prolongating contracts that can only be
cancelled with a formal letter after N years of paying is a total disaster
here.

------
dmode
Brilliant. Freaking. Law. I hope this applies to scammy gym memberships,
Comcast, Equifax, TransUnion (their scam of signing you up), newspaper
subscriptions etc.

------
Ours90
had the same problem with Scribd recently. I've cancelled my subscription in
the end of April, but still got a notification from PayPal about the money
transfer in the end of May. I had to contact them per email and luckily they
were very friendly and accommodating, they've cancelled my subscription on the
same day and I've got my money back in two days.

------
ghosterrific
Do you think this law will require the government to offer online opt outs for
their subscriptions?

------
maaaats
Not strictly equivalent, but one thing I like about GDPR is that withdrawing
consent should be as easy as giving it.

------
qaq
Comcast and Verizon will be upset

~~~
ergothus
Cancelling comcast is only moderately hard.

Getting them to ACTUALLY cancel can require more than a single phone call.

~~~
greggarious
The key is to do it in person. Show up at an office, return the modem, receive
a receipt, and report any future charges as fraud to your CC provider w/ the
cancellation and equipment return receipts as proof.

------
ebikelaw
My bank allows me to cancel my credit card online, which is good enough for
me.

~~~
reaperducer
_My bank allows me to cancel my credit card online, which is good enough for
me._

I tried to cancel a credit card in order to escape a recurring charge I
couldn't cancel. I was informed by Chase that because I had a previous auto-
bill relationship with that company, its charges would follow me to my new
card, and if necessary, my bank accounts.

------
mchahn
This is awesome. Is anyone else old enough to remember trying to cancel AOL?

------
maym86
Will this apply to bank accounts and credit cards? That would be fantastic.

------
sitepodmatt
Scum like WSJ still practice the call to cancel timewaste practice

------
jkw
Will this be true for gyms as well?? That would be a game-changer.

------
nmca
Is there not a service in the US that does this on your behalf?

------
lousyd
I can't see an email or button being any different than the telephone. I would
prefer being able to cancel online. But I don't see forcing companies to offer
that as being all consumer protectiony.

------
echevil
This is great. It was so hard to cancel Adobe subscription

------
thecosas
Does this apply to B2C only or also B2B?

~~~
briandear
It doesn't matter. Though, to be fair, most B2B sales aren't actually
completed online. For example, if you deal with Salesforce, you complete the
sale in an offline process. This law states that an online purchase should
have an online cancellation. It doesn't apply to "tech" \-- it applies to the
sales process. So a guy selling you insurance over the phone -- they aren't
required to allow online cancellation. However, if you purchased the
product/subscription online, then you should be allowed to cancel online.
Basically, the venue of the sale needs to be equivalent to the venue of the
cancellation.

------
philip1209
Does this apply to Comcast?

------
Uhrheber
You know what happened the last time I canceled a magazine subscription in
Germany? I sent them an email, and got the confirmation back one day later.
End of story.

------
theweb1
Perfect! California leading the way, cancelling subscriptions shouldn't be an
issue at all, sadly business use fraudulent ways with it.

------
mehrdadn
Are you actually deaf? Or is lying to get exceptions that are meant for the
disabled actually legal?

~~~
AznHisoka
"exceptions that are meant for the disabled "

Since when was the ability to cancel something online _meant_ for the
disabled?

Either you or a loved one is disabled, and that's why you're so sensitive (if
so, I cut you some slack). Otherwise, I have no clue why you're throwing such
a hiss about this. Many businesses (like cable companies) are being complete
assholes by making it hard for you to cancel their service. Sometimes you have
to lie and act unethically to get back at people like that. Hey, you wouldn't
have to if they were ethical in the first place! They started this whole
prisoner's dilemma! Me? I would love to cooperate and be honest all the time!

~~~
NullPrefix
If more people do this, the scammers may stop supporting this workflow and
force deaf users to get their friends to call.

~~~
mynameisvlad
Wouldn't that actually be illegal? Deafness is a medical condition and I doubt
"get a friend to do it" would be a suitable accomodation.

~~~
NullPrefix
>Our workplace is illiterate, thus we cannot process your emails.

~~~
mynameisvlad
That excuse isn't going to fly when they get sued for not accommodating a
disability. If anything, it'll cause a lawyer to pounce on the case like
there's no tomorrow.

~~~
Zhenya
Pretty sure the grandparent comment was missing a /s

------
fjsolwmv
Businesses will likely comply to presert access to California customer
business. They will build web frontends for proper account management
(cancellation). And they will go out of their way to disable those frontends
for non-CA customers, because they crave the money they are stealing.

~~~
jjoonathan
Even so, outside CA the law will go a long way towards removing plausible
deniability, and that's something.

