Jump to content

Retroactively amended purchase: Difference between revisions

From Consumer Rights Wiki
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Drakeula (talk | contribs)
confirmed
367 edits
→References: license subcat
 
(27 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{under_development}}
{{Delete|article is duplicate and fully AI generated}}
== Retroactively Amended Purchase Experience ==
{{MergeRequest|Article is redundant of several similar articles that need to be deleted (e.g. License euthanasia). Article is also AI slop|Post-purchase EULA modification}}{{SloppyAI}}


=== Overview ===
A '''retroactively amended purchase''' is a purchase wherein the terms, functionality, or usability of a product or service are altered after the purchase. These changes may result from policy updates, the deprecation of supporting infrastructure, or other modifications that affect the consumer’s ability to fully use or benefit from their purchase.
A retroactively amended purchase experience refers to the practice of altering the terms, functionality, or usability of a product or service after it has been sold. These changes may result from policy updates, the deprecation of supporting infrastructure, or other modifications that affect the consumer’s ability to fully use or benefit from their purchase.


This concept highlights a broader issue of ownership and consumer rights in a world increasingly dominated by digital locks, proprietary architectures, and subscription-based models. It often includes changes that render products non-functional or limit their intended use, sparking debates about fairness, transparency, and ethical business practices.
===Overview===


=== Characteristics ===
Retroactively amended purchases highlight a broader issue of ownership and consumer rights in a world increasingly dominated by digital locks, proprietary architectures, and subscription-based models. It often includes changes that render products non-functional or limit their intended use, sparking debates about fairness, transparency, and ethical business practices.
Retroactively amended purchase experiences typically involve:
* '''Dependence on External Infrastructure:''' Changes to servers, authentication systems, or online services that limit the product's usability.
* '''Proprietary Restrictions:''' Use of client-server architectures or digital locks that enforce control over post-purchase use.
* '''Policy Updates:''' Alterations to terms of service or warranty agreements that impose new restrictions or conditions on previously purchased items.
* '''Consumer Disadvantage:''' Negative impacts on the buyer, including loss of functionality, increased costs, or decreased value.


=== Examples ===
==Characteristics==
Retroactively amended purchases typically involve:
*'''Dependence on External Infrastructure:''' Changes to servers, authentication systems, or online services that limit the product's usability.
*'''Proprietary Restrictions:''' Use of client—server architectures or digital locks that enforce control over post-purchase use.
*'''Policy Updates:''' Alterations to terms of service or warranty agreements that impose new restrictions or conditions on previously purchased items.
*'''Consumer Disadvantage:''' Negative impacts on the buyer, including loss of functionality, increased costs, or decreased value.


==== Software Deprecation ====
==Examples==
Products reliant on proprietary authentication servers are often decommissioned when companies phase out support. For example, certain smart home devices became inoperable after their manufacturers shut down the servers required for functionality.


==== Policy-Driven Changes ====
===Revoking perpetual license===
Retroactive enforcement of warranty conditions, such as voiding coverage for using third-party components, alters the original purchase agreement to the detriment of the consumer.  
Some companies change the language of their End-user license agreements to revoke the rights of the consumer for products they've paid for, such as revoking a perpetual license and, oftentimes, replacing it with a subscription model{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}.


==== Service Subscriptions ====
“License euthanasia” is the practice of revoking perpetual licenses under the pretext that the company is looking out for the user’s best interest by forcing them to update to a later version. This term was coined by consumer-rights advocate Louis Rossmann, who observed that Final Draft’s description of an older version of its software as being “of advanced age” “made it sound like they’re doing the kind thing” by putting old software out of its misery<ref>{{Cite web |last=Rossmann |first=Louis |date=26 Jan 2025 |title=Final Draft revokes perpetual software license for your own security; how nice of them!! |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXV4VDvseIE&t=439s |website=YouTube}}</ref>.
Features that were once included in the purchase price are moved to subscription models post-sale, forcing consumers to pay recurring fees for functionality they previously owned.


=== Ethical Concerns ===
===Software deprecation===
Retroactively amending a purchase experience raises significant ethical questions:
Products reliant on proprietary authentication servers are often decommissioned when companies phase out support. For example, certain smart-home devices became inoperable after their manufacturers shut down the servers required for functionality.
* '''Erosion of Consumer Trust:''' Buyers expect the terms of their purchase to remain consistent over time.
* '''Violation of Ownership Rights:''' Restricting post-purchase use undermines the principle of ownership.
* '''Imbalanced Power Dynamics:''' Consumers often have little recourse against providers imposing unilateral changes.


=== Provider Responsibilities ===
===Policy-driven changes===
Providers hold significant responsibility in ensuring that post-purchase changes do not undermine consumer trust or violate fair trade principles. To uphold these standards:
[[Retroactive policy enforcement|Retroactive enforcement]] of warranty conditions, such as voiding coverage for using third-party components, alters the original purchase agreement to the detriment of the consumer.  


* '''Transparency:''' Providers must clearly disclose any potential for post-purchase changes at the point of sale. This includes:
==Ethical concerns==
  * Highlighting dependencies on proprietary infrastructure (e.g., authentication servers or cloud services).
Retroactively amending a purchase raises significant ethical questions:
  * Clearly stating expiration dates for critical functionality tied to subscriptions or external support.
*'''Erosion of consumer trust:''' Buyers expect the terms of their purchase to remain consistent over time.
*'''Violation of ownership rights:''' Restricting post-purchase use undermines the principle of ownership.
*'''Imbalanced power dynamics:''' Consumers often have little recourse against providers imposing unilateral changes.


* '''Grace Periods:''' Providers should offer extended notice periods before implementing changes that impact functionality. This ensures consumers have time to make informed decisions or adjustments, such as:
==Provider responsibilities==
** Migrating to alternative solutions.
Providers hold significant responsibility in ensuring that post-purchase changes do not undermine consumer trust or violate fair-trade principles. To uphold these standards:
** Backing up critical data or content.


* '''Alternatives:''' Providers should offer reasonable alternatives to consumers affected by decommissioned services or features. These alternatives may include:
*'''Transparency:''' Providers must clearly disclose any potential for post-purchase changes at the point of sale. This includes:
** Open access to protocols or APIs, enabling third-party or community support.
**Highlighting dependencies on proprietary infrastructure (e.g., authentication servers or cloud services).
** Buyback programs or refunds for products rendered non-functional.
**Clearly stating expiration dates for critical functionality tied to subscriptions or external support.
** Migration tools to other platforms or devices.


* '''Commitment to Longevity:''' Providers should design products and services to prioritize longevity, avoiding reliance on:
*'''Grace periods:''' Providers should offer extended notice periods before implementing changes that impact functionality. This ensures consumers have time to make informed decisions or adjustments, such as:
** '''Digital Locks:''' Locks that prevent users from independently maintaining or modifying purchased products.
**Migrating to alternative solutions.
** '''Proprietary Client-Server Architectures:''' Systems that artificially limit functionality to a specific service or server controlled solely by the provider.
**Backing up critical data or content.


* '''Respect for Ownership:''' Providers must respect the principle of ownership. Once a product is purchased, consumers should have the freedom to use, repair, and maintain it without interference from retroactive changes or unjust restrictions.
*'''Alternatives:''' Providers should offer reasonable alternatives to consumers affected by decommissioned services or features. These alternatives may include:
**Open access to protocols or APIs, enabling third-party or community support.
**Buyback programs or refunds for products rendered non-functional.
**Migration tools to other platforms or devices.


=== Broader Implications ===
*'''Commitment to longevity:''' Providers should design products and services to prioritize longevity, avoiding reliance on:
The practice of retroactively amending purchase experiences reflects a troubling trend in consumer-facing industries:
**'''Digital Locks:''' Locks that prevent users from independently maintaining or modifying purchased products.
* '''Erosion of Ownership Rights:''' Increasing reliance on digital control mechanisms shifts power away from buyers.
**'''Proprietary Client-Server Architectures:''' Systems that artificially limit functionality to a specific service or server controlled solely by the provider.
* '''Data and Privacy Concerns:''' The integration of data-dependent features into consumer goods complicates ownership and privacy rights.
* '''Precedent for Anti-Consumer Behavior:''' Allowing such practices to persist normalizes anti-consumer policies.


=== Conclusion ===
*'''Respect for ownership:''' Providers must respect the principle of ownership. Once a product is purchased, consumers should have the freedom to use, repair, and maintain it without interference from retroactive changes or unjust restrictions.
Retroactively amended purchase experiences undermine consumer trust, erode ownership rights, and create unfair power dynamics. Providers must adhere to ethical principles, ensuring transparency, fairness, and respect for ownership. Advocacy for stronger consumer protection laws and broader adoption of open standards can help mitigate these challenges.


=== See Also ===
==Broader implications==
* [[Retroactive Application of Policies and Enforcement]]
The practice of retroactively amending purchases reflects a troubling trend in consumer-facing industries:
* [[Consumer Rights]]
*'''Erosion of ownership rights:''' Increasing reliance on digital control mechanisms shifts power away from buyers.
* [[Right to Repair]]
*'''Data and privacy concerns:''' The integration of data-dependent features into consumer goods complicates ownership and privacy rights.
*'''Precedent for anti-consumer behavior:''' Allowing such practices to persist normalizes anti-consumer policies.


=== References ===
===Conclusion===
Purchases that are retroactively amended undermine consumer trust, erode ownership rights, and create unfair power dynamics. Providers must adhere to ethical principles, ensuring transparency, fairness, and respect for ownership. Advocacy for stronger consumer-protection laws and broader adoption of open standards can help mitigate these challenges.
 
===See also===
*[[Retroactive policy enforcement]]
*[[Consumer rights]]
*[[Right to repair]]
 
===References===
<references />
<references />
 
[[Category:Anti-Consumer_Practices]]
[[Category:Common license terms]]
[[Category:Consumer rights]]
[[Category:Consumer rights]]
[[Category:Anti-consumer]]
[[Category:Retroactively amended purchase]]
[[Category:Right to repair]]
[[Category:Rights Stripping]]
[[Category:Subscription-based services]]
[[Category:Subscription-based services]]
[[Category:Right to repair]]

Latest revision as of 06:28, 19 October 2025

⚠️ A deletion request has been made for this article

There has been a deletion request for this page for the following reason:

article is duplicate and fully AI generated

This request will be reviewed and acted upon by the wiki moderation team within one week of the template being added.

To appeal this deletion request, please make an entry at the Moderator's noticeboard.

Do not delete this page before removing all references to it:


🔄 A merge request has been made for this article

There has been a merge request for this page for the following reason:

Article is redundant of several similar articles that need to be deleted (e.g. License euthanasia). Article is also AI slop

Merge with:Post-purchase EULA modification

Once the merge has been completed, please contact a mod, who can delete the extra pages. Alternatively, edit the unneeded pages such that they contain only a redirect to the merged page.

If you believe the merge has been completed but the page is still not deleted please contact a moderator either on discord or via their talk pages.


🔧 Article status notice: This article heavily relies on AI/LLMs

This article has been marked because its heavy use of LLM generated text may affect its percieved or actual reliability and credibility.

To contact a moderator for removal of this notice once the article's issues have been resolved, please use either the Moderator's noticeboard, or the #appeals channel on our Discord server (Join using this link]) or use the talk pages on the wiki and leave a message to any of the moderators. List of current moderators.

Learn more ▼

A retroactively amended purchase is a purchase wherein the terms, functionality, or usability of a product or service are altered after the purchase. These changes may result from policy updates, the deprecation of supporting infrastructure, or other modifications that affect the consumer’s ability to fully use or benefit from their purchase.

Overview

[edit | edit source]

Retroactively amended purchases highlight a broader issue of ownership and consumer rights in a world increasingly dominated by digital locks, proprietary architectures, and subscription-based models. It often includes changes that render products non-functional or limit their intended use, sparking debates about fairness, transparency, and ethical business practices.

Characteristics

[edit | edit source]

Retroactively amended purchases typically involve:

  • Dependence on External Infrastructure: Changes to servers, authentication systems, or online services that limit the product's usability.
  • Proprietary Restrictions: Use of client—server architectures or digital locks that enforce control over post-purchase use.
  • Policy Updates: Alterations to terms of service or warranty agreements that impose new restrictions or conditions on previously purchased items.
  • Consumer Disadvantage: Negative impacts on the buyer, including loss of functionality, increased costs, or decreased value.

Examples

[edit | edit source]

Revoking perpetual license

[edit | edit source]

Some companies change the language of their End-user license agreements to revoke the rights of the consumer for products they've paid for, such as revoking a perpetual license and, oftentimes, replacing it with a subscription model[citation needed - give example].

“License euthanasia” is the practice of revoking perpetual licenses under the pretext that the company is looking out for the user’s best interest by forcing them to update to a later version. This term was coined by consumer-rights advocate Louis Rossmann, who observed that Final Draft’s description of an older version of its software as being “of advanced age” “made it sound like they’re doing the kind thing” by putting old software out of its misery[1].

Software deprecation

[edit | edit source]

Products reliant on proprietary authentication servers are often decommissioned when companies phase out support. For example, certain smart-home devices became inoperable after their manufacturers shut down the servers required for functionality.

Policy-driven changes

[edit | edit source]

Retroactive enforcement of warranty conditions, such as voiding coverage for using third-party components, alters the original purchase agreement to the detriment of the consumer.

Ethical concerns

[edit | edit source]

Retroactively amending a purchase raises significant ethical questions:

  • Erosion of consumer trust: Buyers expect the terms of their purchase to remain consistent over time.
  • Violation of ownership rights: Restricting post-purchase use undermines the principle of ownership.
  • Imbalanced power dynamics: Consumers often have little recourse against providers imposing unilateral changes.

Provider responsibilities

[edit | edit source]

Providers hold significant responsibility in ensuring that post-purchase changes do not undermine consumer trust or violate fair-trade principles. To uphold these standards:

  • Transparency: Providers must clearly disclose any potential for post-purchase changes at the point of sale. This includes:
    • Highlighting dependencies on proprietary infrastructure (e.g., authentication servers or cloud services).
    • Clearly stating expiration dates for critical functionality tied to subscriptions or external support.
  • Grace periods: Providers should offer extended notice periods before implementing changes that impact functionality. This ensures consumers have time to make informed decisions or adjustments, such as:
    • Migrating to alternative solutions.
    • Backing up critical data or content.
  • Alternatives: Providers should offer reasonable alternatives to consumers affected by decommissioned services or features. These alternatives may include:
    • Open access to protocols or APIs, enabling third-party or community support.
    • Buyback programs or refunds for products rendered non-functional.
    • Migration tools to other platforms or devices.
  • Commitment to longevity: Providers should design products and services to prioritize longevity, avoiding reliance on:
    • Digital Locks: Locks that prevent users from independently maintaining or modifying purchased products.
    • Proprietary Client-Server Architectures: Systems that artificially limit functionality to a specific service or server controlled solely by the provider.
  • Respect for ownership: Providers must respect the principle of ownership. Once a product is purchased, consumers should have the freedom to use, repair, and maintain it without interference from retroactive changes or unjust restrictions.

Broader implications

[edit | edit source]

The practice of retroactively amending purchases reflects a troubling trend in consumer-facing industries:

  • Erosion of ownership rights: Increasing reliance on digital control mechanisms shifts power away from buyers.
  • Data and privacy concerns: The integration of data-dependent features into consumer goods complicates ownership and privacy rights.
  • Precedent for anti-consumer behavior: Allowing such practices to persist normalizes anti-consumer policies.

Conclusion

[edit | edit source]

Purchases that are retroactively amended undermine consumer trust, erode ownership rights, and create unfair power dynamics. Providers must adhere to ethical principles, ensuring transparency, fairness, and respect for ownership. Advocacy for stronger consumer-protection laws and broader adoption of open standards can help mitigate these challenges.

See also

[edit | edit source]

References

[edit | edit source]
  1. ↑ Rossmann, Louis (26 Jan 2025). "Final Draft revokes perpetual software license for your own security; how nice of them!!". YouTube.
Retrieved from "https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Retroactively_amended_purchase&oldid=27677"