Core Viewpoint - The court ruled against the technology company operating the cloud storage app for using misleading practices regarding automatic subscription renewals, emphasizing the lack of clear notification to the user [1] Group 1: Legal Findings - The court found that the company used a very inconspicuous gray small font for the automatic renewal notification, which reduced the likelihood of user awareness [1] - The company was deemed to have engaged in prohibited bundling practices by defaulting consumers into agreeing to automatic renewals, thus stripping them of their autonomy in decision-making [1] - The court ordered the company to refund the total amount of 239.2 yuan that was deducted from the user due to the automatic renewal [1] Group 2: User Experience - The user, 唐某, initially paid 0.3 yuan for a 24-hour trial membership and was later charged 29.9 yuan monthly without explicit consent [1] - The user only discovered the automatic deductions after seven months and sought a refund, which was initially denied by customer service [1] - The company claimed that a notification was sent five days prior to the renewal via in-app messaging, which the court found insufficient [1]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of automatic renewal subscriptions in internet products, where consumers are often misled into agreeing to automatic renewals without clear notification, leading to potential financial losses [1][2]. Group 1: Consumer Experience - A consumer named Tang unknowingly subscribed to a 24-hour trial membership for 0.3 yuan, which was followed by an automatic renewal charge of 29.9 yuan per month without proper notification [1][2]. - The app's interface used inconspicuous gray small font to indicate the automatic renewal, making it difficult for consumers to notice important information regarding the subscription [2]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The Guangzhou Internet Court ruled that the company violated Tang's right to be informed and to make autonomous choices, as the app's design did not adequately alert consumers to the automatic renewal terms [2][3]. - The court determined that the company failed to fulfill its legal obligation to provide clear and reasonable notice of significant terms, thus infringing on consumer rights [2]. Group 3: Resolution - The court ordered the company to refund Tang a total of 239.2 yuan for the automatic renewal charges, and the company later agreed to a settlement that included additional compensation for Tang [3].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of automatic renewal subscriptions in internet products, emphasizing how some companies use misleading app interfaces to trap consumers into unwanted charges [1][2]. Group 1: Consumer Experience - A consumer named Tang unknowingly subscribed to a 24-hour trial membership for 0.3 yuan, which led to an automatic renewal charge of 29.9 yuan per month without proper notification [1][2]. - The app's interface did not provide clear notifications about the automatic renewal, making it difficult for consumers to notice important information regarding their subscriptions [2]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The Guangzhou Internet Court ruled that the company violated Tang's right to know and choose, as the automatic renewal notice was presented in a very inconspicuous gray font, which diminished the likelihood of consumer awareness [2][3]. - The court found that the app failed to fulfill its legal obligation to prominently alert consumers about significant terms, thus infringing on consumer rights [2]. Group 3: Court Ruling and Outcome - The court ordered the company to refund Tang a total of 239.2 yuan for the unauthorized charges [3]. - The company appealed the initial ruling but later reached a settlement in the second trial, agreeing to refund the full amount and provide additional compensation to Tang [3].

Core Viewpoint - The court ruled that online operators must obtain explicit consent from consumers before providing automatic renewal services, and cannot use hidden methods to present automatic renewal as a default option [1][6]. Group 1: Case Background - A consumer, Tang, was charged 29.9 yuan for automatic renewal without prior notification after initially paying 0.3 yuan for a 24-hour trial membership [2]. - Tang discovered the automatic charges only after seven months and sought a refund, claiming the company had hidden the automatic renewal terms [2][3]. - The company used small gray font to indicate automatic renewal, which was deemed insufficient for consumer awareness [3]. Group 2: Court Ruling - The court found that the company violated Tang's right to know and his right to choose by not providing clear and prominent notifications about the automatic renewal [3][4]. - The ruling mandated the company to refund the total amount of 239.2 yuan to Tang [4]. Group 3: Legal Implications - The new Consumer Rights Protection Law, effective July 1, 2024, requires operators to prominently inform consumers about automatic renewals before service acceptance and prior to renewal dates [5]. - The court emphasized that "significant notice" must be clear enough to attract consumer attention, and the current notification method used by the company was inadequate [6]. Group 4: Recommendations and Industry Impact - The court issued judicial suggestions to the involved platform, recommending explicit consent for automatic renewals and strict adherence to notification obligations [7]. - Experts noted that subscription models must prioritize consumer rights to ensure transparency and fairness, which can enhance long-term business success and consumer trust [8].