Ein italienisches Gericht sagt, dass Netflix seinen Kunden bis zu 576 US-Dollar für Preiserhöhungen zurückerstatten muss
https://www.techspot.com/news/111955-italian-court-netflix-must-refund-customers-up-576.html
Ein italienisches Gericht sagt, dass Netflix seinen Kunden bis zu 576 US-Dollar für Preiserhöhungen zurückerstatten muss
https://www.techspot.com/news/111955-italian-court-netflix-must-refund-customers-up-576.html
9 Kommentare
Look, a country’s government that actually cares about its citizens not getting fleeced by big corporations and tries to do right by them.
While I don’t like the price hikes, I’m not sure I see the logic in this one. Are streaming platforms just never allowed to increase prices for existing customers? What would a valid reason be for having prices go up? Should existing users be locked into their initial sign up price forever?
>Berlin and Cologne courts ruled that price increases based on vague, generic formulas are invalid because they do not let users understand the real reasons behind the higher costs.
It’s an entirely optional service and you can quit any time you want with the click of a few buttons.
F*ck streaming services. I had everything and now I have none.
Germany court had a similar ruling and in The Netherlands they started a case
If you’re Dutch and want to partipate in the mass claim: https://beschermingconsument.nl/netflix
This is why I don’t have streaming services
Streaming services have circled back to the inconvenience of cable tv; pricey, having ads and not one subscription has what you need, forcing you to pay for multiple subscriptions if you want to watch different things, not to mention licensing issues in different countries. It’s just not feasible anymore to keep up with some of your favorite shows when you have to pay several $20/month subscriptions to get a decent quality stream without ads.
good ruling but it doesn’t fix the bigger issue of streaming becoming overpriced and fragmented again
> According to the court, the clauses allowing the increases were unfair because they allowed changes to be made without stating a valid reason in the contract
What a joke. Let’s fine someone based on stupid formality, ignoring rules of demand, inflation, possibility that prices were lower to promote the service, additions to catalog, changes in licensing fees, changes in competition, and million other factors.
I don’t get why do communist brains think that state is some magical oracle that can evaluate all the factors and determine what’s fair better than free market. Especially Italy’s government, which is one of the most populist, untrustworthy and corrupt in the EU.
I guess it’s more bearable being fucked by your government when it fucks also someone who has more money than you.
Why didn’t they just cancel the service if prices were too high??