[callalex]

The right to unsubscribe being discussed here has nothing to do with emails. It states that if you paid for a subscription online, you must be able to cancel it online within a few clicks as well. No “call us” or “send a registered letter during a full moon and low tide only” nonsense. It’s really great.

[NelsonMinar]

There are numerous summaries of that right available here: https://www.google.com/search?q=california+right+to+unsubscr...

[Alupis]

> No “call us” or “send a registered letter during a full moon and low tide only” nonsense. It’s really great.

I am very skeptical even this is as great as some think. Outside CA, most companies can simply ignore these "viral" style laws with no consequences.

[r00fus]

As another Californian, I'd love examples of where this is ignored, or where non-californians also benefit from these.

I also gladly unsubscribe easily without frustration - just not sure if this is common in other states.

[Alupis]

How about a concrete example of a big business that did not allow you to cancel online prior to this law?

Netflix? Nope. Comcast? Nope. Google? Nope. Verizon? Nope. AT&T? Nope. Apple? Nope. PG&E? Nope...

Where is this mythical renaissance of new online cancellations?

Turns out - most big businesses did this already... oh, but now it's the law but who's enforcing? Lawyers who gain private settlements? That's not enforcement, that's a racket.

[callalex]

Specifically from your list Comcast, Netflix, AT&T, PG&E were all services that I had to call on the phone multiple times, and sometimes send registered letters to in order to terminate service. I’m taking exclusively about personal experience here, not about helping friends.

Edit: and by “terminate service” I mean “stop fucking taking my money, I don’t even live at the address you are claiming”

[rahimnathwani]

New York Times

[callalex]

I can assure you as a Californian that this law is not ignored. They are taking payment from my credit card so they can’t claim ignorance of my California address.

[Alupis]

There's no citizen enforcement clause for most of these laws and therefore this mostly means nothing - and where there is it just turns into a money grab/shakedown by bottom feeding lawyers (see existing FAL & P65 suits). Suits get settled, lawyers get paid, plaintiff gets a cut, no wrongdoing is admitted, and nothing changes.

It's not about claiming ignorance. It's about not caring about CA viral laws and CA's inability to effectively enforce them around the world.

Much like how most companies laugh when some EU citizens tries to flex GDPR in the US... hilarious unless you're Google...

People lock-in on the intent and names of these things and believe they've "won" the privacy war. Just like the "Inflation Reduction Act" these laws do very little if anything for their namesake.

[callalex]

It’s really odd to me that you are telling me that my lived experience is false and impossible. Every subscription I have made since this law passed, I have been able to cancel online. This includes newspapers, store club memberships, random podcasts and other online entertainment, educational software, and more.

Sometimes the government really does work for the people. It is actually possible.

[Alupis]

Overwhelming majority of those things you listed could already be cancelled online.

You can read the laws yourself. There's not a lot of teeth for small businesses to comply.

Go look at the state AG website for P65 complaints (they are all by law published). 99% are privately settled without wrongdoing (you can see this on AG website too), and some fee is paid to the plaintiff's attorneys. Sometimes the math says it's cheaper to comply, but often not. Small (and even big) businesses around the country freely ignore P65 despite the law having citizen enforcement. If you search on the AG website you will find many repeat offenders. P65 laws have been around for decades...

There's a difference between what people believe should happen and what actually happens. If you believe these laws have "won" the privacy war - you are mistaken.

[r00fus]

Why are you conflating right-to-unsubscribe with P65? They are different laws with different enforcement mechanisms. Also consumers don't find P65 useful whereas we see benefit from unsubscribing.