[factfindingisfn]

"Finally, if you were subscriber to Twitterrific for iOS, we would ask you to please consider not requesting a refund from Apple. The loss of ongoing, recurring revenue from Twitterrific is already going to hurt our business significantly, and any refunds will come directly out of our pockets – not Twitter’s and not Apple’s. To put it simply, thousands of refunds would be devastating to a small company like ours."

So a company builds a system that sits on another system to do a thing, charges for a thing, shuts down that thing, and then asks their customers to not ask for a refund for the thing on the thing that is broken...seems a bit....icky

[tshaddox]

I strongly disagree. Their product’s “reliance” on an external system wasn’t just some incidental reckless dependency. It’s a Twitter client, so it’s i here fly “reliant” on Twitter. It’s not unlike someone selling a book about how to use Twitter’s API, then politely asking people to not ask for refunds for the book years later when Twitter shuts down its API.