lmao even
https://twitter.com/CultureCrave/status/1757157795496149145
You will be suing them too, yes?
 |
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
lol
lmao even
https://twitter.com/CultureCrave/status/1757157795496149145
You will be suing them too, yes?
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
Daddy Bezos will demolish this stream piggy rebellion in no time
I doubt that. They just lost billions from RoP. They're nearly bankrupt.
>Terms and conditions are subject to change
Oof.
Your recourse is to be able to cancel the service, not sue them for damages because you have no damages.
You know most of those terms and conditions bits in contracts you sign don't really matter, any legal precident supposedly set by a contract cannot override actual, existing laws. So yes, you can sue them for damages if they did something that would count, legally, as damages regardless of what the contract says you moronic bootlicker lmao
Go check the UCC, dawg. If you signed it, you're presumed to have read it. If the conditions of the service you're receiving have changed, you're entitled to get out of the agreement.
Amazon gave you notice that the change was occurring, gave you a chance to either pay more for the same service, accept the current price for a similar but inferior service, or to cancel the service.
This case will get blown out so fast because it's not like you're even receiving a good that has deteriorated.
>it's not like you're even receiving a good that has deteriorated.
Ads are for Boomers and morons.
>sue
sure buddy, lets extend the trial for years lets zee who runs out of money first
I have schmucks like you killed once a week, kid
>they're suing them for has to do with the yearly subscription.
They didn't even factor those contracts into the change by grandfathering them in or have it not apply until renewal KEK. Total pajeet operations.
you shouldn't talk about things you know nothing about
From what I can tell, a lot of what they're suing them for has to do with the yearly subscription. People that subscribed before the change were under the impression that they would have ad-free streaming for the full cycle.
Is that actually the case? It sounds highly unusual for Amazon to try something like that.
From the document
>But last month, Amazon changed the deal. To stream movies and tv shows without ads, Amazon customers must now pay an additional $2.99 per month. This is true even for people who purchased the yearly, ad-free subscription, and who are now mid-way through their subscription.
>This is not fair, because these subscribers already paid for the ad-free version; these subscribers should not have to pay an additional $2.99/month for something that they already paid for.
>3. For years, Amazon advertised that its Prime subscription included ad-free streaming of movies and tv shows. Like other consumers, Plaintiff purchased the Prime subscription, believing that it would include ad-free streaming of movies and tv shows. But it does not.
If that's the case, then yeah, they're entitled to have the service without ads for the rest of the billing cycle. I can't believe Amazon would try something like that.
That is probably a case worth making. I expect Amazon will drown the complainants in litigation and lawyers though.
I think they'll just back down and let them finish the billing cycle without ads or the fee. Otherwise, it's a PR nightmare.
>raising prices is illegal
t. american idiot
That's not what's being argued here.
Let me put it simply for your monkey-brain: Bait and switch scams are illegal, selling someone a product and giving them an inferior product other than promised is illegal OUTSIDE of the scope of their contract.
A completed sale is a binding contract and that's what the yearly subscription was.
they sold a monthly subscription to a product
they have now raised the price
deal
with
it
they did not sell a fixed price for eternity subscription iidot
>I'm moronic!
You could've just said that instead of pretending to know what you're talking about. Sucking corporate wiener isn't going to get you anywhere either btw.
cell/internet/cable companies have been grandfathering contracts for half a centaury for a reason.
>for 12 months = eternity
>they sold a monthly subscription to a product
They also sold yearly subscriptions. You pay one time, once a year, and get service for one-year, with the terms of that service being decided at the point of sale, when you paid for the service. If they change the service halfway through your subscription, they are in breach of contract and owe you a refund of your subscription, at a bare minimum for the value of the remaining months on it.
I would argue they owe you a full refund, because you paid one lump sum for one year of service, and you didn't get your one year of service as described, so they don't get your money. QED.
You could reasonably argue that in court, yes. It has happened.
>deal
>with
>it
Frick off, fetus-eating moloch.
>find a hairdresser you like
>they convince you to prepay for 12 haircuts at $10 each
>after haircut #3 the hairdresser tells you the rest of the haircuts will be $10 extra for each or you get nothing (she spent the prepayment money on weed and can't afford to keep the shop open)
>no refunds
>more food metaphors
every fricking time
Shalom
Okay this has merit. Yearly subs should be ad free until their subscription runs out. That is a service bought and paid for in advance, they can't alter it without refunding the remaining cost of the service. And not as Amazon credit, as cash.
Amazon is run by a israeli enforcer and pajeets now.
>Amazon is run by a israeli enforcer
Wrong.
There are no israelites on Amazon.
I believe you can get a prorated refund.
>prorated refund
Not how it works. Needs to be fully refunded or they grandfather your old contract.
How frickin old are you zoomers? Do you actually pay bills? I still have a $15 a month covid discounted cell plan that they cant get rid of cause it's grandfathered. Were your parents never based enough to tell how they have a b***hin cell phone bill from 10 yrs ago that is still in effect cause they are grandfathered in?
>Terms and conditions are subject to change
They cannot change them unilaterally, that's not how it works. The TOS that actually apply (if the judge doesn't throw them out immediately) are the ones the user signed, which is why there should be an offline copy of each version of the TOS
>They cannot change them unilaterally, that's not how it works
Counterpoint: They're Amazon. The frick Timmy gon do
Dont care there has never been and will never be anything worth watching on that service.
>Terminal List
>Reacher season 1
prime video is the only streaming service I have because I pay for regular amazon prime, but they have the boomer dadcore action stuff down to a science.
>barely find enough reason to pay for a prime subscription, the free 2 day shipping is like 80% of its worth
>
The shows are so bad you be begging for ads, this is a mercy on the viewers.
But you can cancel Prime any time, right? So it's a rolling contract, new month, new terms.
Read the thread before replying, Jamal.
Never, reading threads is for dumb jerks
afaik you were just paying for the video service originally so adding ads and a secondary service to remove the ads ain't something you can sue over.
The way they did it probably wasn't entirely kosher since it would start mid billing cycle. I'm sure they've covered their asses but in a just world you'd have to agree to the change being implemented next time you're billed.
Should've seen this coming... Amazog, noseflix, in fact all tech firms adopt a "growth model" where they take millions/billions of investment while not making any profit to drive out competitors and capture the market, then once they have a dominant position they milk their customers (cattle) as much as possible.
Need new trust-busting laws against these firms asap. Coordinate it as an EU-US agreement to really frick them.
I'm going to finish watching a series before cancelling my account, frick Amazon.
RoP did it for me, been boycotting those homosexuals since
I’m sure there’s something in the agreement when you sign up that they can do whatever the frick they want with the service and if you don’t like it you can go to mandatory arbitration or suck a fat wiener (for a small fee)
It probably won't go anywhere, but in the strange world where it does make a difference, they'll just go and slowly increase the price over time to the point they wanted.
Terms of Service
read it next time newbies.
Yes, that is the case but that doesn't shield them from all liability.
It still can be considered a bait and switch scam, specifically with the yearly subscriptions.
SOOOOO you need to correct everyone and state clearly Anon.
>no they legally can do this, but it may be a breach of contract for people who were already signed up for a year contract.
Stop promoting the idea you can just sue a company for changing its ToS, because no... no you can't. ToS are ironclad for a reason.
>ToS are ironclad
lol no they aren't. They allow a lot of leeway to frick over customers but they are not "ironclad" by any means. And Amazon actually fricked up in the case of israeliteing yearly subscribers out of a full year of the specific service they paid for, because they are going to have to issue refunds at a minimum for this.
doubt.jpg
What makes you doubt it?
heard there was a special a special reason why all this has happened that no one can understand
I don't think we've heard the last from anyone even REMOTELY involved in all of this
that's not just my instinct, but also what a lot of people might be saying
>ToS are ironclad for a reason.
Terms of service clearly state they can alter the terms of that service any time they want and your recourse is to cancel the service or to eat the shit sandwich you have been served.
Law is what 12 jurors decide it should be. No more, no less.
never had a subscription to netflix, hulu, prime video,... i still Vietnamese (has no recognition for copyright laws) or russian pirate websites.
here's a link to the complaint if anyone is interested to read it
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.331191/gov.uscourts.wawd.331191.1.0.pdf
yeah, they are gonna settle out of court 100%
The free shipping is the only reason. I love not having to go to tarmart and sending people shit for free. Prime video a dumping ground.
>The free shipping
Pussy.
Too afraid to drive out to a pickup location to get it that way, huh? Thank god you never breeded.
Why waste precious moments of my life in traffic?
Jokes on them, I have Prime but don't watch Prime Video because nothing good is on it.
Good luck