I admit i half-read this second link, but the essential nuance it adds is that the ruling process didn't allow the violators (see: companies making it extremely

I admit i half-read this second link, but the essential nuance it adds is that the ruling process didn't allow the violators (see: companies making it extremely hard to come out of a subscription) to do their homework in order to drill holes into this regulation that would have stopped their immoral buisness practices. I understand there is a "by the book" process that should be respected, but this seems very fishy to me. I am certain the regulation would have passed had the tables been turned (meaning the companies would benefit from that said regulation)