Amazon Prime under accusation in the US: “Customers manipulated, impossible to cancel”
[ad_1]
WASHINGTON. The Federal Trade Commission has accused Amazon of deceiving its customers into signing up for the Prime service without obtaining their full consent and then making the cancellation of the paid service tortuous. The lawsuit was filed by the FTC in federal court in Seattle. The documents state that Amazon used “manipulative, coercive and deceptive” means characterized by the presence of “hidden paths” on the site to lead customers to subscribe and then keep them hooked to its online store. The cause is one of several actions that the Biden Administration has undertaken to try to limit the market dominance of the so-called Big Techs in an attempt to create an environment where competition can also favor medium-sized companies and companies.
According to the FTC – an agency led by Lina Khan – Amazon Prime is the largest subscription program in the world and generates revenues of 25 billion dollars a year. In addition to traditional Amazon parcel shipments, it also offers access to film, music and television series catalogues. A Prime member pays $139 per year in the US. There are over 200 million subscribers to the service worldwide.
Under pressure from the Ftc, Amazon had changed the cancellation process for the Prime service in April, but the “violations are still ongoing”, specified the federal agency, underlining that a user must make five clicks (steps) to unsubscribe if using the computer, well you are instead if you do the procedure via a smartphone. However, once the page has been found and then the procedure for unsubscribing has been found, the “repentant customer” is inundated with emails and offers to change his mind, notes the Ftc which has requested a financial penalty and an end to the deceptive behavior on the part of Amazon.
The lawsuit is yet another trouble for Amazon which last year had pleaded with the Ftc twice: once for Alexa and the other for the home surveillance system, Ring. In both cases, customer privacy and the storage of sensitive data were at the center of the dispute. —
[ad_2]
Source link
