3 ms·

> you can't show any substantial damages here. Nobody got harmed because a subscription option ceased to be available A few dollars for one person can add up q

by Retric 3y ago

> you can't show any substantial damages here. Nobody got harmed because a subscription option ceased to be available A few dollars for one person can add up quickly in aggregate. Again, they could have easily rolled this out as existing subscriptions expired. Further the existence of that option sets them up for meaningful penalties not simply reimbursement. > Contracts get broken all the time, and the correct legal remedy is very often simply to ensure payment for services previously rendered and a refund for any other payment. No. That’s often what one side offers as a low ball, but it is the legal system is who ultimately gets to decide on remedies when each side disagrees and it’s relatively rare for them to accept a partial refund of the remaining term. Amazon could have offered a nominal refund say 1$ or say an extra week extension for free. Anyone accepting that wouldn’t have been able to sue. But the existence of a partial refund policy on its own isn’t a remedy.

crazygringo 3y ago
There's no remedy needed because there's no damages because you can cancel and get a prorated refund. This isn't some major contract between two companies where there's a pre-negotiated penalty for breaking it. And with these kinds of small consumer transactions, nobody cares about interest.
- Retric 3y ago
  You already acknowledged that their offer wasn’t enough to make people 100% whole. That’s by definition damages. > And with these kinds of small consumer transactions, nobody cares about interest. Amazon defiantly cares about the ~half billion per year in interest they collect collectively on these subscriptions. It’s backed into the annual discount they are willing to give. Balancing that benefit is the entire point of class action lawsuits. Where one person isn’t going to chase after 2$, a law firm is happy to chase after a slice of x00 million in damages. On the surface X people get some trivial payout, but society is vastly better off when companies can’t illegally nickel and dime people without any consequences.

by Retric 3y ago

crazygringo 3y ago

There's no remedy needed because there's no damages because you can cancel and get a prorated refund. This isn't some major contract between two companies where there's a pre-negotiated penalty for breaking it. And with these kinds of small consumer transactions, nobody cares about interest.

Retric 3y ago
You already acknowledged that their offer wasn’t enough to make people 100% whole. That’s by definition damages. > And with these kinds of small consumer transactions, nobody cares about interest. Amazon defiantly cares about the ~half billion per year in interest they collect collectively on these subscriptions. It’s backed into the annual discount they are willing to give. Balancing that benefit is the entire point of class action lawsuits. Where one person isn’t going to chase after 2$, a law firm is happy to chase after a slice of x00 million in damages. On the surface X people get some trivial payout, but society is vastly better off when companies can’t illegally nickel and dime people without any consequences.