Slashdot Mirror


UK Gov To Investigate 'Aggressive' In-app Purchases

hypnosec writes "The UK Government will be examining whether free to download apps are putting unfair pressure on kids to pay up for additional content within the game through in-app purchases. Office of Fair Trading (OFT), UK, will be carrying out the investigation of games that include 'commercially aggressive' in-app purchases after a number of cases have been reported whereby parents have incurred huge bills after their kids have spent huge amounts on in-app purchases."

10 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. Yes by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You mean like a game that lets you make steady progress for a few hours, then suddenly ups the difficulty level to a point where the only way to continue is to pay for something? Few adults can resist, how many kids would be able to?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  2. Re:Your kid, spending your money . . . by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is myopic, and I bet you are not a parent. In fact I bet you're probably still a kid, with that attitude.

    It is not a new trend that companies make it easy to spend huge amounts of money before a parent knows what's going on. Buying a kid a toy used to be a safe bet, the purchase of the item was the sum total of the toy's price. Nowadays, every device has a built in app-store or similar functionality and a credit card is required to even make the device function (why does Apple require a credit card to download free apps or update apps that you've already paid for?!).

    Expecting parents to be looking over the shoulder of their kids, who are still too young to have developed the ability to fully comprehend the consequences of spending 50c every few minutes over the span of a month, is unreasonable, and companies that engage in predatory sales in this manner should not be given a free pass on the back of the "well parents should be looking after their kids" argument.

    I owned and ran a cell phone shop for 10 years, and one of the most frequent complaints was parents giving a "safety phone" to their kids at age 15 only to rack up huge bills on premium ringtone services. Sure, those kids should probably have been on prepaid, but that does not clear the companies charging $5 per ringtone, and then auto subscribing the number to a $5/day new ringtone service of responsibility. Yes, this happened, just like I'm describing it.

    Companies feeding on the impulsiveness of children should be strung up and flogged. So should Apple, for making it a requirement that a credit card be entered into the phone at all times.

    --
    I hate printers.
  3. Re:Your kid, spending your money . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just for the record Apple does not require a credit card for using your phone, your computer or even the itunes store. If you want you can open a prepaid account (for free) that needs to be fed itunes vouchers to order something.

    And this was precisely done to prevent kids to overspend on their itunes account. At least that's how it was presented at the introduction of the iTunes store (Yes that feature exists that long).

    Frankly I don't feel sorry for parents who could not bother to protect their children from overspending by using simple limiters like prepaid accounts. It's like soft-padding your house when you have a toddler. But for some reason when it comes to technology parents are not supposed to bother and a law has to be done do cover the parents lazyness.

  4. Re:Education for parents needed - set a PIN! by nospam007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Not being a great reader my son just clicks OK ..."

    Isn't that the root of all the problems? Not only payments but also viruses, trojans and other crap.

  5. Re:Let's blame everyone else by symes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd hazard a guess there are a fair few parents out there that don't quite understand apps, smart phones and the like. But in the case of UK law, I'd also imagine that there are instances where apps are misleading people to think play is free, but it isn't. If this is the case then they could be falling foul if UK law - a bit like calling something a beef burger when it is actually 75% Winnie-the-Pooh.

  6. Re:Your kid, spending your money . . . by Kjella · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So if you're not a very good parent and neglect them and they get kidnapped, raped and killed that's totally the parent's fault. There's absolutely nobody else we could blame in this situation. These companies aren't there to play nice, they're there to rip you off for hundreds and thousands of dollars when you slip up and leave your kid with access to your credit card. They're like a hawk just waiting for the mother to look away so they can swoop in for the kill and you want to defend them. Sure, parents could do better but that is no reason to protect predatory companies looking to exploit innocent children and stick their parents with the bill.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  7. Let's not blame the parents by Sesostris+III · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't have kids, and I don't have an iPad either. However I do have friends who are, to be blunt, technically naive. It might surprise the Slashdot crowd, but one friend actually went on a work course where they were taught such things as the difference between files and folders! (To be fair the same friend is trying to get more computer literate - she has bought herself "Windows for Dummies" and is studiously working through it. I think she's actually thought of as something of a geek at where she works; she's a qualified midwife and works in a hospital unit for premature babies, so she's not in anyway 'stupid', just not computer literate).

    Anyway, the point is that many would not understand the technology or technological trends in a way that we would on Slashdot. To many a game is a game, whether physical (a board game or card game or some such) or virtual (Solitaire anyone?) Games in the past do not allow you to 'buy extras' mid game, so this behaviour is unexpected. From past experience allowing your child (or mother) to play a game on a computer or iPad would be considered safe - the possibility of actual money being spent would not be considered and therefore not dealt with. To be honest, not being an iPad owner nor a computer game player, I would not be aware of this 'feature' in games - after all I've never seen it in Solitaire!

    So let's not blame the parents. Let's instead blame those taking advantage of the possibilities of new technology and of the naivete of actual users. It is this that's behind the investigated by the OFT.

    --
    You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
  8. Re:Your kid, spending your money . . . by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't about kids spending money. It's about deceitful advertisements that trick people in buying stuff.
    The average person might see through these tricks. But a huge population is dumber than the average person.

  9. Re:Your kid, spending your money . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, the solution is another provider who don't force a credit card. Such as android - no card needed!

    Or you can go to the apple store and try to buy an iphone/ipad with cash. Claim that you don't have a credit card, ask them to set up the device for you. Maybe they can? If they tell you to get a card "no risk because you don't have to use it, tell the clerk to ready the device using his own card. No risk because there will be no use, right?

  10. $100 to $500 for Simpsons: Tapped Out by thepacketmaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree that some of these games could be excessive if you purchased all the in-game items. I calculated that purchasing each "premium" item at least once could cost between $100 and $500 for Simpsons: Tapped Out. This is very similar to gambling. You can have sensible people that view it as some entertainment and will stop after a limit, or you have the people that don't set limits and lose a lot. With that comparison, kids are protected from gambling so there should be something in place for software companies to protect children. Software companies do need to make money of course, and this method is important because it allows the consumer to try a game before buying/paying for it. It also allows people that don't want to grind to be able to experience the end-game content. I do object to games like Simpsons: Tapped Out that make it next to impossible to ever get premium items without paying, but that's their choice. On the flip side, some responsible parenting would be good too. Teach children the value of money and of working for a reward (in-game or otherwise). Don't give your children access to phones or software that are attached to credit cards or billing accounts. Restrict them to game/gift cards for purchasing content. (perhaps that could be the new currency for allowances?)

    --

    --

    Luck is just skill you didn't know you had.