This is something that puzzles me for a while. On the Internet we know everyone is a real life scientist/celebrity/super hero/billionaire/lawyer/all of the above, so let's say you're talking about rocket sciecne you'd expect a lot of guys telling you how NASA should be using HyperDrives to power their rocket because it's something you can buy from the store. But let's say you bought anything virtual and then you were screwed and then you look for Internet helps, you invariably get "the EULA owns you". We're talking about cases that are fairly ironclad in favor of the customer. Maybe you bought a month service of something and the network was down half of the time. Maybe you bought something that was never delivered. Maybe you bought some virtual currency and then found out half of the guys are hacking for infinite currency. Now I don't think this is because people are more knowledgeable about this since that's not even the case here, as if you look into microtransaction one of the biggest problem they always had is fraud with chargebacks, so there is indeed recourse for the customer. If the Internet operates like it usually does, shouldn't we have people that'd be like "This happened to me one time and I remember what I saw from Law & Order and then sued them for $10 million! This is like money in the bank!" Are people all trying to second guess the popular opinion since everyone knows you're never that cool if you agree with the prevailing opinion so that they side with the company in question instead? I mean sure there's always this kind of 'the evil guys they own everything we're doomed!' deal, except that at least Americans have access to the chargeback which puts credit card companies, who is clearly the top of the evil, on our side, since they've an incentive to side with the customer (any company that's fraudlent means they charge them even more for their service).
I've been reading that a lot of services threaten to ban your account entirely if you chargeback since chargeback imposes a huge cost to them, so it'd be like say you chargeback your WoW 3 month payment then they'll ban your WoW account and your Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 account too. Can't you just charge those back too? I guess there's a timing issue too, but if the credit card company agreed with you on the initial chargeback, shouldn't that be a proof by induction that they must agree with you to chargeback everything you lost value as the first chargeback?
I've been reading that a lot of services threaten to ban your account entirely if you chargeback since chargeback imposes a huge cost to them, so it'd be like say you chargeback your WoW 3 month payment then they'll ban your WoW account and your Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 account too. Can't you just charge those back too? I guess there's a timing issue too, but if the credit card company agreed with you on the initial chargeback, shouldn't that be a proof by induction that they must agree with you to chargeback everything you lost value as the first chargeback?
