3 ms·

> Depends upon the jurisdiction. Under Australian legislation this is likely to be considered misleading and deceptive conduct toward retail consumers, and Adob

> Depends upon the jurisdiction. Under Australian legislation this is likely to be considered misleading and deceptive conduct toward retail consumers, and Adobe could be subject to significant financial restitution. I‘m pretty sure, it isn’t. Go check the TOS of any public transport yearly subscription models and they will certainly have the exact same clause. I had to pay a penalty fee for terminating my yearly public transport subscription in Berlin early.

angry_octet 6y ago
It depends if it is judged to be deceptive conduct, so it is relevant how the information is presented. Burying conditions in the terms of service or contract, but then misleading people with other information on a web page, can mean that the preferential interpretation stands. Standard verbiage in the contract like 'this contract is the only terms of the contract' is just meaningless (except for specific categories like auctions and real estate, where other provisions may still apply, like the cool off period). One example of the consumer law being applied is in regard to drip pricing, which was commonly used by airlines and hotels: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/drip-pricing https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/drip-prici... https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/airbnb-and-edreams-give-undertakings-to-accc-for-improved-pricing-practices https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/airbnb-and-edreams-giv... Pricing rules, in this case Partial Pricing, are quite clear: If you promote a price that is only part of the total price, the total price must also be displayed at least as prominently as the partial price. This means customers should be able to identify the total price in the advertisement at least as easily as prices for any component parts. https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing-surcharging/displaying-prices https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing-surcharging/display... Also relevant: subscription traps: https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-warns-consumers-to-beware-of-subscription-traps https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-warns-consumers-t... I am unfamiliar with consumer protection in DE, and publicly owned services like the railways may have special pricing legislation, but new EU harmonized laws are being introduced for digital services: https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/productliabilitylinks/2021/january/germany-introduces-new-eu-consumer-protection-rules https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/productliabilit... Sadly, the EU system prevents any member state from having stronger protections. For subscriptions there are already strong rules about clearly indicating the total price, and the amount that is fair for early termination: https://www.osborneclarke.com/insights/distributing-games-in-subscription-models-in-europe/ https://www.osborneclarke.com/insights/distributing-games-in...

angry_octet 6y ago

It depends if it is judged to be deceptive conduct, so it is relevant how the information is presented. Burying conditions in the terms of service or contract, but then misleading people with other information on a web page, can mean that the preferential interpretation stands. Standard verbiage in the contract like 'this contract is the only terms of the contract' is just meaningless (except for specific categories like auctions and real estate, where other provisions may still apply, like the cool off period). One example of the consumer law being applied is in regard to drip pricing, which was commonly used by airlines and hotels: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/drip-pricing https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/online-shopping/drip-prici... https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/airbnb-and-edreams-give-undertakings-to-accc-for-improved-pricing-practices https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/airbnb-and-edreams-giv... Pricing rules, in this case Partial Pricing, are quite clear: If you promote a price that is only part of the total price, the total price must also be displayed at least as prominently as the partial price. This means customers should be able to identify the total price in the advertisement at least as easily as prices for any component parts. https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing-surcharging/displaying-prices https://www.accc.gov.au/business/pricing-surcharging/display... Also relevant: subscription traps: https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-warns-consumers-to-beware-of-subscription-traps https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-warns-consumers-t... I am unfamiliar with consumer protection in DE, and publicly owned services like the railways may have special pricing legislation, but new EU harmonized laws are being introduced for digital services: https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/productliabilitylinks/2021/january/germany-introduces-new-eu-consumer-protection-rules https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/productliabilit... Sadly, the EU system prevents any member state from having stronger protections. For subscriptions there are already strong rules about clearly indicating the total price, and the amount that is fair for early termination: https://www.osborneclarke.com/insights/distributing-games-in-subscription-models-in-europe/ https://www.osborneclarke.com/insights/distributing-games-in...