[andrew_v4]

I'm not familiar with this specific product. But this is really a dark side to SaSS, broadly defined, that I have not seen a good solution to.

It's not helpful to have a service provider that can renege on commitments when they take issue with them for whatever reason. In this case, it (based admittedly on limited information) feels like Stripe agreed to something and then later unilaterally just decided that they didn't like it and bailed. There is a certain amount of risk in any contract, and what bothers me about this kind of thing is that providers think they are entitled to all of the upside but none of the downside of the contract. As a small business owner myself, if I committed to do something (including for a company like stripe) I would be on the hook for delivery, even if it turned out to be different than I had planned for (within the agreed scope). Stripe should be held to the same standard.

[salawat]

This is why you have to be extremely aggressive in vetting contracts. The way it works nowadays, is people hunt down templated contract clauses, spruce 'em up, and dance them out take it or leave it, with a favorite being "We reserve the right to change these terms without notice at any time."

If not the people in the world called these companies and platforms on their shenanigans and actually forced them to engage in a meeting of the minds, most company legal and sales departments would

A) be larger B) be waaay more responsive to customer needs, as you'd not be able to rely on one template to CYA from SLA's from whoever may be calling or reaching out.

Force a meeting of the minds, stop the abuse.