A new lawsuit from the FTC is being rolled out in tech giant Adobe’s direction.
The company is being accused of prioritizing profits over customer service and charging hidden fees that users had no clue about when signing up.
The FTC alleged in the lawsuit issued yesterday how the primary goal was to ignore the thousands of complaints being generated in its direction from those who wished to cancel their subscriptions because of how costly they had become.
However, the company is believed to have made it so difficult to opt out and cancel that in the end, they would be forced to pay unlawfully hefty amounts.
Revenue and profits were on the tech giant’s mind so that is why they never even tried to make that convoluted process simpler. Even when the regulatory body did roll out a probe two years back, highlighting how the practices being dealt with were illegal, the tech giant made zero efforts to address the matter or stop consumers from undergoing harm.
Time after time, it got many chances to rectify the process but seeing the ignorant behavior was clear evidence of how it was no longer keen on making the cancellation process a success.
The FTC at that time even tried to request the jury to restrict the company from carrying out such deceptive practices but even that was not possible.
On this front, Adobe’s general counsel was requested to provide a statement to defend itself from the accusations and he did nothing but mention how all of the business practices being carried out were lawful and vowed to prove that the company did nothing wrong.
According to Dana Rao, Adobe’s subscriptions are flexible, cheap, and convenient for the masses to use. The fact that it fits their timeframe, budget, and users’ needs is a great priority and that is why they hope to continue working like this in the future as well.
The company mentioned how they are so transparent to all of their users and ensure everyone leaves with a smile on their face and has the most positive of experiences. They ended the argument by mentioning how they have enough evidence to stand by their claims and therefore would be counteracting all the claims made by the FTC in court.
So what is the FTC talking about in terms of the high cancellation fee that is used as a retention tools? We researched more on this front and found this answer.
The government’s complaints stem from the fact that a host of manipulative enrollment practices were used to intentionally lock subscribers into carrying out payments every month. In this manner, Adobe would go about pre-selecting options through default where the famous annual paid monthly plan was rolled out. This subscription option would lock users into a yearly plan despite paying on a monthly basis.
If it was canceled after the two-week timeframe, they would owe the company a fee for early termination that would end up costing 50% of the rest of their yearly subscription. These material terms are usually hidden throughout the enrollment process and FTC thinks it’s not fair.
The company cannot go about adding this to disclosures curated to go unnoticed by users who end up never seeing it. And when you talk about charges, getting access to the company’s suite of platforms could end up costing a whopping $700 each year as reported by Bloomberg.
Image: DIW
Read next: YouTube Rolls Out New Experimental Notes Feature Under Videos
The company is being accused of prioritizing profits over customer service and charging hidden fees that users had no clue about when signing up.
The FTC alleged in the lawsuit issued yesterday how the primary goal was to ignore the thousands of complaints being generated in its direction from those who wished to cancel their subscriptions because of how costly they had become.
However, the company is believed to have made it so difficult to opt out and cancel that in the end, they would be forced to pay unlawfully hefty amounts.
Revenue and profits were on the tech giant’s mind so that is why they never even tried to make that convoluted process simpler. Even when the regulatory body did roll out a probe two years back, highlighting how the practices being dealt with were illegal, the tech giant made zero efforts to address the matter or stop consumers from undergoing harm.
Time after time, it got many chances to rectify the process but seeing the ignorant behavior was clear evidence of how it was no longer keen on making the cancellation process a success.
The FTC at that time even tried to request the jury to restrict the company from carrying out such deceptive practices but even that was not possible.
On this front, Adobe’s general counsel was requested to provide a statement to defend itself from the accusations and he did nothing but mention how all of the business practices being carried out were lawful and vowed to prove that the company did nothing wrong.
According to Dana Rao, Adobe’s subscriptions are flexible, cheap, and convenient for the masses to use. The fact that it fits their timeframe, budget, and users’ needs is a great priority and that is why they hope to continue working like this in the future as well.
The company mentioned how they are so transparent to all of their users and ensure everyone leaves with a smile on their face and has the most positive of experiences. They ended the argument by mentioning how they have enough evidence to stand by their claims and therefore would be counteracting all the claims made by the FTC in court.
So what is the FTC talking about in terms of the high cancellation fee that is used as a retention tools? We researched more on this front and found this answer.
The government’s complaints stem from the fact that a host of manipulative enrollment practices were used to intentionally lock subscribers into carrying out payments every month. In this manner, Adobe would go about pre-selecting options through default where the famous annual paid monthly plan was rolled out. This subscription option would lock users into a yearly plan despite paying on a monthly basis.
If it was canceled after the two-week timeframe, they would owe the company a fee for early termination that would end up costing 50% of the rest of their yearly subscription. These material terms are usually hidden throughout the enrollment process and FTC thinks it’s not fair.
The company cannot go about adding this to disclosures curated to go unnoticed by users who end up never seeing it. And when you talk about charges, getting access to the company’s suite of platforms could end up costing a whopping $700 each year as reported by Bloomberg.
Read next: YouTube Rolls Out New Experimental Notes Feature Under Videos
