Governor Gavin Newsom has signed California’s “click to cancel” Assembly Bill 286 into law to make it easier for consumers to opt out of subscriptions. The bill, introduced in April 2024, forces companies that permit online or in-app sign-ups to allow for online or in-app unsubscribing as well.

"AB 2863 is the most comprehensive ‘Click to Cancel’ legislation in the nation, ensuring Californians can cancel unwanted automatic subscription renewals just as easily as they signed up — with just a click or two,” said California Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo.

    • bassomitron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      Will this actually work or will companies go off your billing address? I guess you could probably technically get a proxy address in California for billing. Regardless, this should just be a national law.

      • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Companies that do business in CA will likely follow the law for all of their customers. It’s far more expensive to try to have two systems and possibly handle a CA resident incorrectly.

        • webhead@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I assure you they won’t. It’s not going to be that expensive to only show an option if you’re in California. Companies already do this with other things like privacy related stuff.

          If the company is already a scumbag company that makes it impossible to cancel, this will only stop them where they have to follow a law.

          • fishos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            The reason you see all the pop ups for cookies nowadays is because of GDPR, a European law. It absolutely does work like this. It’s vastly cheaper to run one system then 2 systems. It’s the same reason California emissions laws become defacto laws for the rest of the country.

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              GDPR has a weird quirk of applying to all EU citizens whether or not they’re currently in the EU. Cars are physical things and it is harder to make different models. A check of “Is California billing address? Show button. No? Don’t show button.” would be trivial to implement and would probably result in enough money to make it worth it.

          • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s expensive if you screw up and handle a CA resident wrong. It’s also easy to get fined, and easy for the fines to scale up.

        • jballs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Colorado and California have laws that say you have to list salaries on job postings. As a result, many job posting say “not eligible for residents of Colorado or California” on them, even when the posting is specifically looking for people from those states l.

          I’m wondering if this new law has that loophole where companies can just say “hey, we told people from California that our service wasn’t for them. It’s not our fault that they still signed up for it.”

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s far more expensive to try to have two systems and possibly handle a CA resident incorrectly.

          Apple: Hold my doesn’t-cure-cancer fruit smoothie!

      • a baby duck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Doubt they’ll go by IP location, but there may be a workaround depending on the service.

        For example, California already has a similar law around cancelling gym memberships initiated online. Planet Fitness customers can just set their “home gym” to one in California to get access to one-click cancellation, even if their billing address is in another state.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    2 months ago

    As good as this is, it’s just another example of Republicans shrinking the federal government to unsustainable levels. Click-to-cancel will be implemented in California while showing your ID to access porn sites is happening in Texas, but have fun canceling any subscriptions.

    • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      So a Democrat win in California shouldn’t be celebrated, because there’s an unrelated pointless Republican law in Texas? What are you on about?

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m on about the fact that the federal government is so weak that this is the sort of state-to-state bullshit people have to put up with.

        • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s literally how the government was designed though. Do you believe that there should be a Constitutional amendment to protect porn and ease of subscription cancellation? I agree that the system is flawed, but a win here deserves to be celebrated even though there was a loss somewhere else.

          • The Pantser@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Is the company in question national or local to CA only? This is the defining line for laws like this. If a company cannot be distinguished from the services it provides in CA vs any other state then the laws of one state should influence all others since the company is not different between states. Unless they create a different website for each state then they will have a hard time verifying if a user really is from CA and be able to apply the law.

            I could be visiting CA and sign up for something while there. My address is not CA, my billing address is not CA, I could be using a VPN connected to my home. But I am physically in CA and signed up for Planet fitness online. Now whose laws protect me? CA or my home state?

          • pory@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            There is a constitutional amendment that protects porn though. The first. What’s changed in Texas isn’t porn’s legality, but restrictions on distribution (though yes, Texas’s law is useless and completely misunderstands the internet’s dynamics)

    • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Imo that’s great. The best display of what policies make people’s life better is a stark contrast between two groups implementing opposing systems.