That's a bit one-sided, don't you think? They're also often used when companies fail to provide the product/service that was paid for, or when the charge was un

That's a bit one-sided, don't you think? They're also often used when companies fail to provide the product/service that was paid for, or when the charge was unauthorized. That's what it's there for. The author doesn't say why the chargeback was made so I'm not sure why we're assuming it was fraudulent. The software site promises a lot of features and it's entirely possible that the buyer required one that didn't work as advertised. It's also possible that the credit card used was stolen, which would make the original buyer, not the person doing the chargeback, the "asshole".