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

Does anybody have insight into the dissenting opinion. I skimmed through it and it just looked like the commissioner was saying "this is overreach, partisan and congress should do this". Am I missing something?

Ben Thompson tried to make this case in various places when Amazon was sued by the FTC. Roughly “businesses should be able to make a case for why you should still be a subscriber”.

I disagree. Fuck subscriptions, they’re predatory.

Just for fun, I asked Claude for a dissenting opinion > # Dissenting Opinion on FTC's Click-to-Cancel Rule

While the FTC's intention to protect consumers is commendable, this new "click-to-cancel" rule may have unintended consequences that could harm both businesses and consumers. Here are some key points of dissent:

1. *Overreach of Regulatory Authority*: The FTC's broad application of this rule to "almost all negative option programs in any media" may exceed its statutory authority. This sweeping approach could face legal challenges.

2. *Increased Costs for Businesses*: Implementing new cancellation systems and processes could be costly, especially for small businesses. These costs may ultimately be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices.

3. *Potential for Increased Fraud*: Making cancellation too easy might inadvertently increase the risk of unauthorized cancellations by bad actors, leading to service disruptions for legitimate subscribers.

4. *Loss of Customer Retention Opportunities*: By prohibiting businesses from discussing plan modifications or reasons to keep existing agreements during cancellation, the rule may deprive consumers of potentially beneficial alternatives or information.

5. *Inconsistency with Other Industries*: The rule may create an uneven playing field, as some industries (like telecommunications or utilities) often have different cancellation processes due to the nature of their services.

6. *Consumer Responsibility*: The rule may unfairly shift the burden of subscription management entirely onto businesses, potentially reducing consumer responsibility and awareness.

7. *Innovation Stifling*: Strict regulations on subscription models could discourage innovation in service offerings and pricing structures that might benefit consumers.

8. *Compliance Challenges*: The 180-day implementation period may not be sufficient for all businesses to comply, especially given the broad scope of the rule.

While consumer protection is crucial, a more balanced approach that considers the needs of both consumers and businesses might be more effective. The FTC should consider a more nuanced rule that addresses specific abusive practices rather than imposing broad restrictions on all negative option programs.