FTC Charges Online Marketers with Scamming Consumers out of Hundreds of Millions
- Thread starter mediasup
- Start date
This is cute:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKYfJ_GwKak&feature=channel_video_title]YouTube - Free Trial Offers[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKYfJ_GwKak&feature=channel_video_title]YouTube - Free Trial Offers[/ame]
This shit is escalating to such epic proportions it is time this industry starts policing itself or run the risk of some government oversight department being created to do just that in a very draconian fashion.
Oh, but I thought the market would police itself, right?
Whatever do you mean? The market is not perfect? It's not some type of benevolent being? Oh, i guess government is good for something afterall - namely protecting those who don't have 100 hours a day to stay aware of all all the scams out there.
??? Maybe you have me confused with some other asshat? Note, I am not saying I'm not an asshat, just maybe not the asshat you're referring to.
What I am proposing is doing what the corporatist's do. Nominate one of your own to do the watchdoging.
I have never made any asinine remarks about the market being benevolent.
In closing, I am a die hard Libertarian, Ron Paul gives me wood and the credo I live by is Caveat emptor!
with swoopo having declared BK and the lack of minty fresh teeth whiteners, me thinks that that the money may be long gone.
But in all seriousness, stop going all "OH NOEZ, THE INTERWEBZ FAILING" cuz the FTC is doing its job. I'm surprised it took the FTC this long to do this.
But in all seriousness, stop going all "OH NOEZ, THE INTERWEBZ FAILING" cuz the FTC is doing its job. I'm surprised it took the FTC this long to do this.
a couple of things i find interesting about this article:
Takin' it back to the old school? I thought everyone quite using Oprah in 08 or 09. Also, where the hell can you find a Rez V offer? I think they just took forever filing these charges.
and then there is:
Since when do you need written authorization? Does that make every online purchase illegal? Confused I am.
Takin' it back to the old school? I thought everyone quite using Oprah in 08 or 09. Also, where the hell can you find a Rez V offer? I think they just took forever filing these charges.
and then there is:
Since when do you need written authorization? Does that make every online purchase illegal? Confused I am.
Its for ACH direct debit. They put in their bank account info, and za za zoom there goes the monies. It's a recent tactic by the FTC in nailing rebills/continuity programs.
Ok, but just as an example, I use Paypal to buy things all the time with 'Instant transfer' which debits my account with ACH.
Obviously, I consent to the purchase, but I don't provide written consent. I even a couple of monthly subscriptions that are billed this way.
What they're saying is the consumers enter their bank info and dont read the TOS. Every month they do an ach debit from the account, based on the vaguely worded, sometimes buried, TOS. There is a big difference between you logging into your paypal and sending money, or setting it up to transfer every month, as opposed to doing an ACH debit on a monthly basis......which, again, I will provide no legal opinion since it is on a case by case basis.
Got it. The wording they use is kind of weird.
On another note, anyone else find it ironic that the FTC goes after people who use vaguely worded TOS when they are notorious for being vague in their guidelines for what they consider acceptable?
On another note, anyone else find it ironic that the FTC goes after people who use vaguely worded TOS when they are notorious for being vague in their guidelines for what they consider acceptable?
Its not hard to see who or what they are going after, just search ripoff report or complaints board for the advertisers being run out there, i guarantee by end of summer every one of them is in some suit with the FTC including those who support them in the chain
FTC said 3-5 cases were ready to go out, this is one, 2-4 more to go that's already in queue
this complaint is interesting in that it talks about affiliates and the affiliates making their own pages, sounds like they are setting it up for more spin off cases.
Technically speaking debit cards fall under Reg E too, but the language is hazy at best on debit card transactions run as credit. It is only the recurring card not present transaction that pose the problem. Obviously there are many very mainstream companies that ride the fence on this very tight, generate huge revenues, and never have an issue. I suppose when you're billing out half a billion in scammy sales though its a different set of rules that apply 