Slashdot Mirror
Federal Judge Rules Amazon Must Refund Parents Duped By In-App Purchases (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader shares a Gizmodo report: A federal judge has ruled Amazon is liable for billing unwitting parents after their children made unauthorized charges in apps. The court will decide exactly how much money Amazon owes customers in the coming months. The federal judge's decision asserts that Amazon received several complaints from customers about in-app purchases that they were unaware of, mostly incurred by children. The decision points out that Amazon promoted apps as free but failed to inform parents about in-app charges that could be incurred.
The modern app appers who made in-app purchases knew what they were doing, because only apps can app apps! Only LUDDITES want refunds for apps because they only know how to use LUDDITE software, not appy app apps!
Apps!
maybe dont give your child a tablet with access and a CC linked to it. I mean dont the parents have responsibility for the things they allow their children to do???
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
I see nothing but good coming from this. Less of a proliferation of games that need you to continuously buy stuff to play. We have laws against advertising to children here, but this is exactly what these apps do.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
One of my pet peeves is this non-sense of demanding payment information in order to register - even though I have no intention of buying anything.
The iTunes store demands it when you create an Apple ID via an iOS device. You have to create one on the regular website on a desktop in order to get the skip the payment information link.
Roku demands it with the lame reason that it's "for your convenience". You have to badger their customer support people to waiver it. And even then they repeat the horseshit that it's "for your convenience".
And we all know it's to take advantage of people with no impulse control or who are fooled by the $.99 price and think, "That's nothing." and rack up the charges for stupid shit.
Rule #1 in entrepreneurship: make it easy for the customer to give you their money.
#2 - make it hard for them to stop.
That's why you can sign up for anything and you're in instantly, but to cancel it takes 4 to 6 weeks. Although, to Netflix' credit, they don't pull that horseshit.
I'd like to point out that I'm impressed by Netflix' technology and love their treatment of the customer. I just wish they had more content I like - sorry to cancel. I'd like to reward great tech and customer treatment, but they fall short their for me.
Well if the systems needs a password to install free apps / you need a CC to get account to download free stuff that needs to change.
There needs to be a way that free stuff does not need a password and or a way to set a buy pin that is only needed to buy stuff.
15 min free range needs to only kick in for buying mode and not kick in on password for free app and then let's you buy for 15 min with out password.
Also force no CC needed for free accounts.
Apple failed on all 3 parts.
Now in the past some cable systems used to make you go though the full buy screens with price $0.00 for the free VOD now they don't do that any more. As a system like that makes it easy to mix up free and paid stuff.
With Roku there is a link you can use to skip the credit card portion of set up. https://my.roku.com/signup/noc...
enjoy
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Well, they must of have changed it. I got mine a few years ago and I had to badger the customer service people to waiver the payment info. And then I bitched on a survey.
I guess they actually listened.
The worst part of the whole thing is that there is no way to lock down IAPs with Amazon. You can restrict purchases from the Amazon app store, but if you have a credit card saved to your account, kids have free reign over IAPs - and some app developers take full advantage of this by tossing catalogues of other apps (which you can purchase) right inside their other apps. My son spent about $10 on some of the shittiest apps I've ever seen because of this. I called Amazon at the time and their solution was simply for me to remove the card from my account.
I'd say if the kids click on it, and it bills the parents... sounds like the kids just signed up for paper delivery route, lawn mowing, or whatever may instill a little more maturity. Sure the kids may not have known better, but what better way to teach a useful life lesson, not a punishment, just a way to learn how the real world works.
Require by law a wallet to be used. You'd put money into there and it wouldn't directly charge a debit/credit card. Once the wallet is empty, it has to be reloaded manually. Furthermore, there should be a PIN option too in game, perhaps.
There is a place that exists outside of the walls that confine both children and many Slashdoters, it's often refereed to as the outdoors. Despite the rumors and unverified reports, it is usually a safe place filled with wonders and opportunities. It has the useful side effect of creating real, lasting memories, and providing physical exercise. Perhaps utilizing this foreign environment would be advantageous, providing the end user with a hyper-real non-virtual world, allowing for greater physical and mental maturation before introducing devices that present the opportunity for in-app purchases.
Presumably Amazon only keeps a moderate fraction of the money, the rest going to the publisher. Will this ruling require the people who actually asked for and benefited the most from the money to give it back?
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Well, in-app purchases can be blocked... these days. But app purchases cannot. If you've so much as downloaded one app from Amazon's store, and want to keep it running, you must have your account logged in.
And you can't block the purchase of new apps.
Children cannot be observed 24/7 either.
Guess who needs to change?
Yep, that's right, Amazon. Amazon needs to make it so parents can require a password on every purchase... like Google... like Apple.
But yeah, go on, blame the parents for trying to keep their children up to date on technology that will rule their future work lives. The idiots!
1) Amazon took a gamble. They knew what they were doing and they were counting on winning the court case to keep the $$$, then appearing to capitulate to end users and locking it down a bit more (to appear to be "listening" to their customers). Amazon did this by design. They were jerks, but it's the way businesses work. Get the money if you can, then fight giving it back. They counted on customers just paying it to be done with it (and they are not the only ones that have done this).
2) It totally amazes me that people who don't have children always seem to have the parenting thing figured out. I myself was a "militant" parent when it came to giving my kids access to any purchasing power (even indirectly). I never (ever) leave a "live" credit card attached to my Amazon account (or any online account, for that matter) for this very reason...but that took a bit of work to make it that way and still work okay. Visa gift cards in the amount of whatever purchase I needed to make at a given time do the trick (even if there's nothing left on the card, it still acts like a "live" credit card). However...I 100% understand how a parent (who's not as militant about their credit cards) could easily be duped into thinking Amazon would have protections in place that aren't there (Again...by design on Amazon's part, which is not an opinion, but what the courts decided).
3) Final point: A lot of folks here also seem to forget that, as users of /. we are, be default, pretty tech savvy and most of us probably understand how to protect ourselves online. Amazon bet on the non tech-savvy users to get duped by this, then give up complaining and just pay it. The users should have been more careful, yes, but Amazon set the trap on purpose (again: not an opinion...that's exactly what the courts say). If a store set up a rack to purposely fall as you walked by and tried to get you to pay for the resulting broken items, you'd try to prove that they set the trap and were responsible. What happened here was the online version of that very thing.
Amazon took a gamble and it didn't pay off.
-AC (too lazy to actually set up a real account)
1) Amazon took a gamble. They knew what they were doing and they were counting on winning the court case to keep the $$$, then appearing to capitulate to end users and locking it down a bit more (to appear to be "listening" to their customers). Amazon did this by design. They were jerks, but it's the way businesses work. Get the money if you can, then fight giving it back. They counted on customers just paying it to be done with it (and they are not the only ones that have done this).
2) It totally amazes me that people who don't have children always seem to have the parenting thing figured out. I myself was a "militant" parent when it came to giving my kids access to any purchasing power (even indirectly). I never (ever) leave a "live" credit card attached to my Amazon account (or any online account, for that matter) for this very reason...but that took a bit of work to make it that way and still work okay. Visa gift cards in the amount of whatever purchase I needed to make at a given time do the trick (even if there's nothing left on the card, it still acts like a "live" credit card). However...I 100% understand how a parent (who's not as militant about their credit cards) could easily be duped into thinking Amazon would have protections in place that aren't there (Again...by design on Amazon's part, which is not an opinion, but what the courts decided).
3) Final point: A lot of folks here also seem to forget that, as users of /. we are, be default, pretty tech savvy and most of us probably understand how to protect ourselves online. Amazon bet on the non tech-savvy users to get duped by this, then give up complaining and just pay it. The users should have been more careful, yes, but Amazon set the trap on purpose (again: not an opinion...that's exactly what the courts say). If a store set up a rack to purposely fall as you walked by and tried to get you to pay for the resulting broken items, you'd try to prove that they set the trap and were responsible. What happened here was the online version of that very thing.
Amazon took a gamble and it didn't pay off.
-AC (too lazy to actually set up a real account)
precious snowflake convinces their parents to allow them to purchase *just this one things this one time* and then the parents forget to relock the account; or when some precious snowflake with more savvy than their parents uses the parents password to purchase stuff.
It's *always* someone else's fault.
I wonder if their revenue models account for accidental purchases? Purchases that get made unintentionally because their system is deliberately designed to generate purchases extremely easily, even if the account holder wouldn't otherwise make them in a considered way.
It's hard not to think that both one-click and in-app purchases, especially for games oriented at children, are intentionally designed to generate revenue from purchases that the account holder would not make if they had more consideration.
I guess maybe 10% of it might be useful convenience, but the rest, especially in-app just seems to be opaque about real costs.
I wish I could take a job for $5 an hour and then show up and offer "in-employment upgrades" where I would charge other, unknown-until-purchased fees for doing actual tasks.
"Oh, you want me to show up at 8:30? I offer an AM arrival 5-day pack for $399 per week, otherwise it's $99 per day. And I offer a Stay until 5 PM 5-day pack for the same prices for the AM pack. You can buy the Combo All Day pack for $789 per week. I also offer this in annual subscriptions, $40,000 per year. Buy for five years and it's $195,000."
And parents have that sort of time.
Why do you feel the need to blame the victim for what is clearly a shitty business practice the results of which should have been clear to Amazon?
This is like a speed trap on a rural road, 45 -> 25 -> 45 in a span of half a mile on a flat road with clear visibility and no driveways. Yeah, you should be paying attention to the speed limit, but should that sort of thing really be?
You seem to forget how much parents already have to take responsibility for, and do; what good children are to the maintenance of society and order; and what responsibility you have as a member of society to not set traps for parents, or support those who do.
Let me guess, now you'll claim to have been a parent or to be one. Yeah, right. I wonder, is this guilt for your own failings?
"And if you tire of taking the antibiotics Mr. Johnson, I've included a cyanide capsule in the green packet at the bottom."
Why the hell not, isn't choice a good thing?
"Sir, you're responsible for getting shot today. We didn't make you step outside of your home where old Tom was, thinking he was back in Vietnam."
This isn't about freedom of choice. This is about simple business ethics. Apple and Google offer options in their setups to block this sort of thing, you don't have to use them. That's choice.
Amazon could do the same, and it's not like it would take anything meaningful in resources at Amazon to add the feature. No, this is about getting people in low at 49.99, or 69.99, or 99.99, and then gouging them when they dare turn their back.
Yeah, how dare they! How dare they not throw down $500.00 on a shinier thing with fruit on the back, or take the time out of their non-tech-infested lives to research a good Android tablet. How dare they think "Amazon" and "reputable" and "inexpensive" and "I want my children to feel connected like their peers."
How dare they. Yeah, this is an appeal to emotion, but don't let that cloud this simple truth, you're fucking wrong.
...it is time to give up all your toys until you are mature enough to use them. And, as for you, Big Biz, it is time for you to stop all of your prying!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.