EU's Online Shoppers Get an Extended "Cooling Off Period" 140
mrspoonsi (2955715) writes with word of a new extension to European consumer protection laws: Previously, anyone who bought a product online was allowed seven business days during which they were able to change their mind and return the product for a full refund. This 'cooling-off period,' during which a refund can be requested without being required to give a reason for the cancellation, has now been extended to fourteen calendar days from the date on which the goods are received. Online retailers and providers are now also banned from 'pre-ticking' optional extras on order forms, such as those adding insurance to the cost of a purchase. For the first time, laws have also been introduced to offer a cooling-off period for digital content, including music, films and books, as BBC News reports. Consumers may now cancel an order for digital content within fourteen days, but only if they have not downloaded it.
Re:Wait what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Consumers may now cancel an order for digital content within fourteen days, but only if they have not downloaded it.
RTFS
Re: (Score:2)
I'd guess that less than 1% of all digital content purchases would be in that category. That is to say, I'd guess that 99+% of all digital content purchases would be downloaded immediately.
What do you think?
Plus, this doesn't include subscription services like Netflix, so the more I think about it, the more I think that very few digital c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how it is with video and audio content.
But, according to a previously published article, about 37% of Steam games never get played. And it's probably safe to assume they don't get downloaded either...
http://games.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re:Wait what? (Score:4, Funny)
But, but, but... I thought copying wasn't stealing!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The argument that copying isn't stealing has not been brought to the table by those that oppose copyright. Quite the opposite, copyright proponents were actually claiming that it WAS stealing. Knowing fully well that they were talking bullshit, but it simply is a great way of emotionalizing the discussion. Now they'll have to deal with it being called what it is: Bullshit.
Sorry, but if you bring some argument to the table, make sure it holds some water because one thing you can be sure of, your opponent wil
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So on things in general that are technically not true, but effectively are, is your position that they're bullshit?
Re: (Score:2)
They are not even effectively true. Stealing is taking away a mobile object without the owner's consent with the intent to keep and to deprive the owner of its use. At least according to our laws over here, yours may be different.
The description falls short at the last part. Stealing requires that the owner no longer can make use of the object taken away. It's simply and plainly the unlawful distribution. And that's the problem with it: That we don't have a problem with that. So we needed to call it "steali
Re: (Score:1)
But isn't it also spin to call helping yourself to someone else's stuff "sharing"?
Re: (Score:2)
Only if it wasn't offered. If filesharing tools simply made everything you have on your HD available to everyone, I doubt many would participate in the whole deal.
And just to nitpick, with filesharing tools you usually don't "help yourself" to anything, it is sent to you. Technically, you're not downloading, the other side is uploading to you (i.e. the transfer is initiated by the side having the content, not the one wanting it). But that's semantics.
I'm not really aware of any filesharing tools (outside th
Re: (Score:2)
Both deprive revenue to the creators and distributors of content.
Stealing maybe, but not copying, at least not most of the time. It mainly has to do with the price of the digital goods being acquired.
During an economics class I was taking, the vending machine outside was configured incorrectly to sell 20 oz soda bottles for 5 cents each, whereas the normal price was $1.50. During intercession, one of the students notices it and walks into the class and tells everybody about it. Pretty much the whole class then goes out and buys some sodas.
This is a classic example of how
Re: (Score:2)
Both deprive revenue to the creators and distributors of content. So arguing that copying is not stealing is disingenuous. It's true
I'll make you a deal then.
If I ever happen to violate your copyright in the future, can you promise that you will sue me (and ONLY sue me) for "stealing"? I'll even allow you to use the proper legal name of "theft"
If you can promise that and never ever bring up "copyright violation" while in court, then I'll promise to never again mention how those two laws are not the same.
Deal?
Re: (Score:2)
Stealling deprives revenue.
Copying deprives potential revenue and may, in fact, boost revenue of a certain product.
Take an example a popular TV show:
Someone may ("illegally") download a few of the episodes of it, based on the advice of a friend. They love it and from that point onward they watch it on TV. The show gets another regular viewer and the creator gets all the revenue associated with it. See what the HBO has to say about GoT pirating.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Making unauthorized copies deprives the copyright holder of nothing, directly. It can lead to a diminished demand for the product, which will cause lost revenue. (It can also lead to increased demand: when Baen Books started giving away electronic copies of books the demand for the books themselves went sharply up.) However, an unfavorable review diminishes demand for the product. This is in contrast to stealing, which deprives the owner of something (but can lead to increased demand for the product).
Re: (Score:1)
Well, there's an exception according to the summary that if it's digital content, you can undo that sale for fourteen days, but lose that right if you actually accept delivery. An "I didn't like it!" is great info for bad ice cream, but we can't trust you if you say that about a bad song.
Re: (Score:3)
The change to digital data is welcome.
At least in the UK's interpretation of this EC directive (the Distance Selling Regulations), digital downloads were NOT excluded. The purchase could cancel the purchase at any time up to 7 days after purchase and receive a full refund. Technically, you could download a software package or a movie, and then change your mind and claim a full refund.
While the Distance Selling Regulations specifically excluded copyright material such as computer software, movies, music, etc
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously your money.
Speak for yourself. If a movie is actually good I want to own/keep it, so that I can watch it again at a later point without having to pay again.
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, that's the point where a return policy goes too far.
Re:14 days for a comic book? (Score:5, Interesting)
And here's the point where I dare say that it will work out. People in Europe tend to be different than people in the US. We don't look for loopholes and try to rip off anyone just for the sake of ripping them off. To give you an example.
Just around the corner from here, there's an "open bookcase". One of many in this town, I may add. It's basically a box full of books. You take books you no longer want there and put them in and take books you'd like to read out. As far as I know, there is no way to track these books. You could take them and go and sell them in a yard sale. You could actually make a few bucks that way. Still, people not only just take the books they want to read, they also bring books to stock the bookcase.
While people around here go through the roof if they think you try to slight them or even go to insane lengths to make sure you pay if you try to rip them off, they usually play by the prisoner's dilemma winning strategy: Cooperate and copy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You must have quite a view from up on your high horse.
Meanwhile, in the USA,
Just around the corner from here, there's a store with a "leave a penny, take a penny" cup. Almost every convenient store in this country has one, I may add. It's basically a cup full of pennies. You put change you may not want in there and take change when you'd like to spend s
Re: (Score:2)
(Looks around, spies American flag on top of building across the way.)
Thought I might have woken up in Dreamland where we got invaded by Canada. No such luck.
Our friggin library has free book bins. So do two of the coffee shops. This is hardly the descriminator between civilized Europe and the Wild Wild West of America.
Re: (Score:2)
In my country in EU, we don't even use pennies. Smallest coin is 5 eurocents and all purchases are rounded up or down.
Re: (Score:1)
You should know better than to call out an instance of non-USian holier than thouness on Slashdot.
amazon returns are even better (Score:2)
meanwhile in the US we've been enjoying 30+ day return periods from Amazon
we have free book exchanges too but people leave crappy books so its not usually worth it.
we also have a thing called libraries which are free and have 10s of thousands of books.
america's a great place bro. should check it out some time.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon lets people return digital items? Since when?
I mean, you buy a TV show from Amazon, and if you don't want it or watched it, you can return it within 30 days? Ditto games, apps and music (downloadable)?
These aren't physical items here, these are downloadable items. I.e., I can buy a song from iTunes, not download it, and decide a week later I didn't want it and return it for a full refund. Steam, Google Play, etc., ditto.
Re: (Score:2)
In addition to book exchanges like you describe, here in southern Florida in the US we have a "Santa's helper" table every December, right alongside the road. It has a cool tent and everything. The idea is for people to anonymously leave presents for the needy. People can take what they like if they feel the need. It always seems well stocked.
I'm not sure your image of America is exactly complete. Having done a lot of business with EU companies, I'm not sure your image of Europe is entirely complete ei
Re: (Score:2)
People in Europe tend to be different than people in the US. We don't look for loopholes and try to rip off anyone just for the sake of ripping them off.
Umm, have you ever been to Italy? Or much of eastern Europe (particularly touristy parts or "bad" parts of big cities)?
To give you an example. Just around the corner from here, there's an "open bookcase". One of many in this town, I may add. It's basically a box full of books. You take books you no longer want there and put them in and take books you'd like to read out.
Yeah, my doctor's office has one of those. The local public library does too. I live in the US. What's your point again?
As far as I know, there is no way to track these books. You could take them and go and sell them in a yard sale. You could actually make a few bucks that way.
Yeah, here's the thing -- most Americans, like most people in most parts of Europe, are basically good-natured folk. Most people are not out to deliberately scam other people. And why ruin a nice public resource like this for a few bucks?
But there are always goin
People in Europe rip off US people in rent a cars (Score:2)
People in Europe rip off US people in rent a cars.
With there any transmission problems are blamed on operator error — whether it’s true or not.
Re: (Score:2)
So along with English, you also failed Driver's Ed?
Re: (Score:2)
Manuals are not big in the USA So when people from there go over seas the rent a car people like to try that scam.
Re: (Score:2)
What scam? Pretending that it's normal people know how to drive stick?
Guess what: In Europe, it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how many people are so completely desperate to return a comic book that costs a few cents? People who're that cheap usually are also that lazy that they rather download it, in the end saving the dealer money.
Chart rigging (Score:5, Interesting)
While I welcome these protections I wonder how music, movie and eBook charts will come. You could buy thousands of copies, never download them and then get a refund after that week's charts are in. Could be useful for protest songs like the recent celebration of Thatcher's death.
Re: (Score:3)
I have no doubt that the sale won't count until its non-returnable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, what? There's still people but the makers of music that care about charts?
Re: (Score:3)
RMA (Score:4, Insightful)
Based on my personal experience, this is not new.
The "desist" period has been two weeks for quite a while in many online retailers.
(Very convenient when discussing over an RMA.)
Re: (Score:3)
Law required 2 weeks already in some areas of Europe, just not all. Also, the new part is the return policy on digital content.
Even though I don't think that would help much, they'll do their best to somehow rig it that you immediately start downloading content you bought.
Re: (Score:3)
I can't speak for other countries but in the UK you generally have to do something to accept goods. An automatic download would most likely be considered by a court to be inadequate, and the point of acceptance would move to when you started playing the file.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering how one of the reasons why people buy content online is that they can instantly access it, I'd dare say that you needn't do it automatically. Just present a "press here to start download&installation" button should do both, ensure people will waive that 2 weeks cooldown period and that they have to consent to download it.
Buyer's Remorse (Score:1)
Buyer's remorse is the sense of regret after having made a purchase. It is frequently associated with the purchase of an expensive item such as a car or house. It may stem from fear of making the wrong choice, guilt over extravagance, or a suspicion of having been overly influenced by the seller.
(wikipedia)
Sorry, I have no pity for that. I've had it before, but it's no fault but my own, and I certainly don't expect anyone to make a law to help save me from myself. (on this, or anything else really, I'm adult, why can't the world treat me like one and let me hold responsibility for my actions?)
A buyer should have no more rights to reverse a sale than a seller. What if I have "seller's remorse", I really should have charged more for that, I want it back! yea, great idea! Make a law to voilate others' rights
Re:Commentator's Remorse (Score:5, Informative)
anyone who bought a product online
So this clearly refers to ONLINE PURCHASES. Ones where you are depended on the seller's description and require that to be accurate: neither over-selling the product nor lying about its state, condition or fitness for purpose. In these cases the seller clearly has an advantage and this extension tot he law is meant to rebalance the trading positions.
Re: (Score:1)
you are depended on the seller's description and require that to be accurate: neither over-selling the product nor lying about its state, condition or fitness for purpose.
Offline sellers have impulse sales, sales staff pressure, faster arrangements for financing and delivery of large items (less time for consideration), packaging to obscure a product and make claims the (re)seller is not liable for, obscure rules about returns (timing, requirements), a perceived 'place in the community' merely from physical presence and longevity, and more advantages.
This law is nothing but the EU being used to slow down online retail so it can be co-opted by the established retailers.
Re: (Score:2)
From TFS: This 'cooling-off period,' during which a refund can be requested without being required to give a reason for the cancellation, ...
In other words, "I changed my mind and I want my money back; never mind that the product is exactly as desribed and functions perfectly." This new law is specifically to cover buyer's remorse, not cases of defective product or packing/description.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You can delay an offer to sell you make better than you can delay a "must act now or you'll regret it!" situation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Buyer's Remorse (Score:5, Insightful)
In many cases, you don't know what you're buying on the internet until you receive it. For example, the product looks/works good on the website, but not in real life. It's hard to determine from the website info and pic that the product is good. The size could be wrong (shoes for eg).
I think this is great for online shopping, but also likely to be abused in some cases.
Re: (Score:2)
just dont shop from places with bad pictures, descriptions, or with bad return policies.
in other words stick to amazon.
don't need a draconian government to pull this one off we do it free stateside because It Makes Sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That doesn't sound like something that happens a lot. Do you always make decisions based on extreme events?
It happens a lot here in Germany, people ordering e.g. clothing (several trousers, shirt, etc.) and only keeping the ones they like, sending the rest back again. It really is pretty common, people use the right to return merchandise bought online as a replacement for trying out various items at a shop. A big reason for that is that until yesterday, the SELLER had to pay postage for the returns, so there was no penalty for the buyer if he ordered more than he actually needed. Guess we will see soon if the ne
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
I certainly don't expect anyone to make a law to help ...
A buyer should have no more rights ... than a seller.
... a law to voilate [sic] others' rights just to save me from my foolishness!
You know how I know that you're American?
Great (Score:2)
"are now also banned from 'pre-ticking' optional extras"
Now do the same for free software ?
Re: (Score:2)
The ones you mention are American companies and thus does not have to follow European law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great (Score:5, Informative)
The ones you mention are American companies and thus does not have to follow European law...
...unless they trade in Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as I see crap like preloaded orders I close my browser tab.
That takes care of the issue.
Re: (Score:1)
What if they've pre-checked a box that says "By closing my browser window I agree to these conditions" ?
Re: (Score:2)
By reading the first word in this comment OR opening a web page where this comment is displayed, or its presence insinuated by any means, you agree to offer the life of your first born to Mardhamnmia, goddess of rape, torture and EULA.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, it's the controversial problem of whether an "I agree!" checkbox should be checked or unchecked when it's first presented to the user. There's a third state available in Microsoft Windows supplied checkboxes called "Mixed" that shows the check box in an "in-between" state, but I can't seem to find anybody using that.
Re: (Score:2)
In the UK insurance industry, this is very well regulated - the accepted norm is that you cannot make an assumption, so a checkbox which is neither checked nor unchecked when presented to the user is non-acceptable, with insurance companies moving to either a Yes/No radio set with neither options selected by default, or a drop down with no default value selected.
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, a checkbox indicates "I assume you didn't want this on." or "This option already was set by us to off/on, did you want to change that?"
Re: (Score:2)
You answered your question yourself: It only works in one system, possibly just in one browser. It's nothing that the customer of the webpage would want (why would I WANT to let my user make more decisions than he has to rather than make them for him?) or his user would demand (because he doesn't know it exists), so it does not matter.
Re: (Score:2)
"are now also banned from 'pre-ticking' optional extras"
Now do the same for free software ?
That practice is virtually nonexistant in free software
Re: (Score:2)
Different kind of "free". I think he was referring to "free(with ads)" not "free, as in open source"
Also, some download sites are wrapping free software inside their own adware-spewing "installer"
Re: (Score:3)
A few years ago, UK-based SportsDirect.com got into trouble with the consumer-rights TV show Watchdog, because it was secretly adding a coffee mug and sports magazine to everyone's shopping cart. When I saw the old reruns of the show last week I decided to check out the site and they were still doing this crap even as recent as last week.
I checked the site just now, and they have finally stopped.
It just proves that no amount of public outcry will ever be as effective as simply using the law to regulate busi
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure you are missing the majority of what a "Boycott" is. There is a part about actively convincing others to boycott the same company, in addition to you not buying their stuff. The result is that more and more people damage the companies reputation, and fewer and fewer people purchasing their goods or services. This forces the company to either change their ways to get more consumers or go out of business.
Consumer activism is critical for any society, and it actually works very well when app
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to boycott a real store, you just stand outside with a sign and a bullhorn (and a copy of your rights, for the rights-impaired officer that tries to make you leave). It's a bit harder to boycott a website where none of the customers ever meet each other.
Even the public shaming that SportsDirect.com got from prime-time UK TV wasn't enough to convince them to change. (And they clearly knew about it, because they responded to the show by saying "we are doing nothing wrong, we will not change, it's th
Re: (Score:2)
Actually an internet store would be easier to boycott because you are not required to be at a location. Start posting on every possible site "This URL is a rip off, don't shop there" and add reasons why. If it's legitimate, they can't sue you. If you post under an identity it will hold credibility as well.
I have a news flash for you, corporations don't care AT ALL what the public thinks.
First, no need to be a dick. I was courteous in my response and we can have rational dialogue without sarcasm. To your point, I agree that some companies don't care. This is especially true where the
Exchanges for same title only! (Score:1)
We seem to be missing an important point of copyright law here... it's hard to take away a copyrighted work such as a movie that only needs to be seen once. Theaters have refund policies for "this movie sucks"... but too much of that and a would-be popular movie becomes nonexistent.
Re: (Score:1)
That is why you can't return it if you actually downloaded it. But reading was too much effort i guess?
Re: (Score:1)
Or you could read the summary, which is quite clear - you don't have to take the copyrighted work away, because this is only for the case where the copyrighted work hasn't been downloaded.
A bit anticlimactic... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ITT: Hundreds of yanks... (Score:1)
... teaching us why online retail in EU will collapse.
2 week shipping (Score:2)
Does this mean Europeans will have to wait an extra week for shipping?
Re: (Score:1)
Personally, I would rather see the EU mandate heated toilet seats.
Re: (Score:2)
For once the EU does something FOR the customer and still people bitch. Amazing.
Re: (Score:3)
If it was legal to pay whatever the employer wanted to pay, the average McDonalds worker would be making 45 cents an hour. It doesn't matter how little the amount is, you will always find someone desperate enough to work for literal peanuts, therefore market pressure alone can't raise wages. If market pressure can't do it, the law has to (or it will never get done).
There are things that MUST be done (like making sure everyone is housed, fed, and healthy) that market pressures have no incentive to do. You em
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The system you are describing is basically the current semi-socialist US system of high(ish) taxes on high income, and high welfare on low income, except you are basing it on amount of land owned, instead of income.
The problem is that, in switching to this system, the one group that will feel most harmed by this change is the people who currently own the most land, which also tends to be the same people flooding the government with lobbyist money, meaning that this will likely never happen (without some sor
Re: (Score:2)
B) Drastically raise taxes to provide food and housing directly to the people who need it. (socialist method)
You don't need "drastic" tax rises. All of Europe uses this model (the ECHR gives everyone the right to shelter for example, meaning if you are homeless the government must put a roof over your head) and it really isn't expensive. In fact it is arguably cheaper than the alternatives.
No-one wants to be reliant on the government for shelter. What they provide is terrible, no-one wants to live there. It does give people a chance to get back on their feet though.
The problem with just relying on a minimum wage i
Re: (Score:1)
I hear gold is going to be $10,000/oz...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're stupid enough to buy 'gold' online, go right ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
28.3 grams less you mean?
How much is that in iotas?