←back to thread

FTC announces "click-to-cancel" rule making it easier to cancel subscriptions

(www.ftc.gov)
1737 points pseudolus | 3 comments | 16 Oct 24 13:09 UTC | HN request time: 0.213s | source
Show context
Uehreka ◴[16 Oct 24 15:57 UTC] No.41860626[source]▶
When people try and say that regulating stuff like this is impossible, I often think about how unreasonably great the regulations around “Unsubscribe” links in emails are.

There really seems to be no loophole or workaround despite there being huge incentive for there to be one. Every time I click an “Unsubscribe” link in an email (it seems like they’re forced to say “Unsubscribe” and not use weasel words to hide the link) I’m either immediately unsubscribed from the person who sent me the email, or I’m taken to a page which seemingly MUST have a “remove me from all emails” option.

The level of compliance (and they can’t even do malicious compliance!) with this is absurd. If these new rules work anything like that, they’ll be awesome. Clearly regulating behavior like this is indeed possible.

replies(46): >>41860684 #>>41860824 #>>41860883 #>>41861066 #>>41861129 #>>41861436 #>>41861512 #>>41861678 #>>41861722 #>>41861736 #>>41861811 #>>41861814 #>>41861817 #>>41862226 #>>41862350 #>>41862375 #>>41862533 #>>41862548 #>>41862583 #>>41863105 #>>41863467 #>>41863955 #>>41863981 #>>41864245 #>>41864326 #>>41864554 #>>41864607 #>>41864815 #>>41865404 #>>41865413 #>>41865616 #>>41866082 #>>41866103 #>>41866240 #>>41866351 #>>41866850 #>>41866986 #>>41869062 #>>41869290 #>>41869894 #>>41870054 #>>41870127 #>>41870425 #>>41870478 #>>41871231 #>>41873677 #
justinpombrio ◴[16 Oct 24 16:43 UTC] No.41861129[source]▶
Unsubscribe links are a fantastic regulation, but there is a workaround. I must have received at least a dozen emails from Brown after graduating despite unsubscribing to every email they sent.

The trouble is they're endlessly creative about the lists they put you on. I'd get one email from "Alumni Connections" and then another from "Faculty Spotlight" and then another from "Global Outreach" and then another from "Event Invitations, 2023 series". I'm making those names up because I forget exactly what they were called, but you get the idea. I hope this was in violation of the regulation: surely you can't invent a new mailing list that didn't used to exist, add me to it, and require me to unsubscribe from it individually.

They finally stopped after I sent them an angry email.

replies(20): >>41861495 #>>41861822 #>>41861841 #>>41862170 #>>41862481 #>>41862648 #>>41862820 #>>41862999 #>>41863186 #>>41863220 #>>41863555 #>>41863933 #>>41864179 #>>41864270 #>>41865514 #>>41865698 #>>41867204 #>>41867673 #>>41867742 #>>41868957 #
1. hobobaggins ◴[17 Oct 24 01:16 UTC] No.41865514[source]▶
They probably don't consider themselves (and, as a University, could probably make a strong case) that it's not Unsolicited Commercial Email (UCE), which is the only thing that CAN-SPAM applies to.

And I have to disagree with the OP, though, because the only people who obey CAN-SPAM are the people who are generally not actually real spammers.

CAN-SPAM really only helps you get unsubscribed from marketing emails, not actually spam at all. As with all laws, outlaws will ignore them while law-abiding citizens get caught by them. Real spammers don't care and casually flout laws until, finally, they get caught by technological means.

As usual, the regulations are too little, too late, and apply to a completely different group of people than is even named in the title.

replies(2): >>41866145 #>>41870313 #
2. blackeyeblitzar ◴[17 Oct 24 03:24 UTC] No.41866145[source]▶
The regulations also limited private lawsuits against spammers so we are stuck with no way of seeking justice or compensation
3. gspencley ◴[17 Oct 24 15:00 UTC] No.41870313[source]▶
> CAN-SPAM really only helps you get unsubscribed from marketing emails, not actually spam at all

Some of us consider ALL marketing emails to be "spam", with the sole carve out being if the user consciously and actively opted in.

I have no problem with marketing newsletters existing if people enjoy receiving and reading them. But if you email me without my active solicitation then it's no different than a door to door salesman physically knocking on your door when you don't expect it and don't welcome the interruption.

I will happily concede that legal definitions may differ from my own. But on a personal level, I apply the "Hollywood principle": "Don't call me, I'll call you." If you call me (or email, or knock on my door, or mail me a physical snail-mail letter) and I'm not expecting it, and it is of a commercial nature, it's my definition of spam.