FTC sues Adobe for hiding fees and inhibiting cancellations

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is suing Adobe over allegedly deceptive subscription practices, including hiding “annual paid monthly” commitments, imposing steep early-termination fees, and making cancellation intentionally confusing. Commenters recount similar experiences with Adobe and other subscription services (gyms, media, SaaS), argue that dark patterns and auto-renew traps have become pervasive, and highlight both the lack of strong alternatives to Adobe’s tools and the growing appeal of one-time-purchase or open-source software. Many hope the case will force clearer disclosure, easy online cancellation, and substantial penalties that deter similar behavior across the industry.

Scope of FTC Case and Adobe’s Practices

  • Many commenters report first‑hand experiences that align with the FTC complaint:
    • “Annual paid monthly” plans presented like cancellable month‑to‑month, but with hidden early‑termination fees (often 50% of remaining year).
    • Cancellation flows described as confusing, multi‑step, and designed to mislead or discourage completion.
    • Some say they could not disable auto‑renew while keeping service through the paid term; only a narrow “cancellation window” worked cleanly.
  • There are anecdotes of:
    • Subscriptions continuing after attempted cancellation.
    • Old perpetual licenses becoming unusable when activation servers were shut down.
    • Aggressive upsell and “save” offers during cancellation.

Reactions to the FTC Action

  • Strong support: many think Adobe is a “uniquely bad actor” and hope for large fines, mandated changes, and refunds of past cancellation fees.
  • Some skepticism that penalties will be only a “rounding error” and treated as a cost of doing business.
  • Several note the FTC has recently become more active against tech companies and see this as part of a broader shift.

Broader Critique of Subscription & Dark Patterns

  • Similar complaints aimed at:
    • SiriusXM, gyms (especially in‑person‑only cancellations), newspapers, NYT/The Athletic, Audible, cable/ISP promos, and some banking practices.
    • Credit card updater services that keep merchants charging even after card replacement.
  • Dark patterns highlighted:
    • Phone‑only cancellation, limited business hours, confusing UI, positive‑colored “keep” buttons, hidden fees, and “always on sale” pricing.

Alternatives, Lock‑In, and Piracy

  • Many users say they’ve moved (or want to move) to:
    • Affinity suite, Capture One, DaVinci Resolve, Foxit, Photopea, Krita, GIMP, Inkscape, Blender, etc.
  • However, several professionals argue:
    • Adobe remains functionally superior in key areas (Photoshop, Lightroom DAM, Illustrator, InDesign, After Effects, complex text layout).
    • File‑format and ecosystem lock‑in keep teams and studios on Adobe even when they dislike its business practices.
  • Some describe historical tolerance for piracy as a “get them hooked” strategy; others note SaaS enabled much tighter control and higher, recurring revenue.

Ethics and Corporate Incentives

  • Debate over whether working at companies like Adobe meaningfully affects personal ethics.
  • Repeated theme: public‑company pressure for continual growth and “rent‑seeking” encourages enshittification (higher prices, worse UX, lock‑in) once a firm has market dominance.