Study: Data breaches erode consumer trust
Austin, Texas – Thirty-five percent of consumers would stop shopping at a store where their data was hacked. According to a recent survey of almost 2,000 consumers by software consulting firm Software Advice, another 22% would be much less willing to shop there.
Meanwhile, if their confidence in a retailer’s data were secure, 33% of consumers would be much more likely to shop there and 22% would be somewhat more likely. And while 33% of consumers feel safe overall when using a credit card and 13% feel very safe, 22% feel increasingly concerned and 7% expect to get hacked. Twenty-five percent of consumers do not use credit cards.
In addition, only 20% of respondents would feel more confident if a retailer communicated that they are taking security measures to protect their personal data.
Michael Kors names Hugo Boss Americas head as menswear president
Hong Kong – Michael Kors has named Mark Brashear to the newly created role of president of men’s. Brashear was most recently at Hugo Boss, where he held the position of CEO and chairman, Americas. Prior to his five-year tenure at Hugo Boss, Brashear was president of Faconnable from 2001 to 2008 and executive VP, Southwest Unit, at Nordstrom, where he worked from 1993 to 2001.
“In the coming months we are launching a men’s fragrance, introducing a new collection of men’s watches and opening our first flagship store to feature the full men’s offering, in SoHo,” said John D. Idol, chairman and CEO of Michael Kors. “The addition of Mark to our team now enables us to build substantially on the momentum we’ve created.”
FTC files compliant against Amazon
Washington, D.C. – Amazon.com, Inc. has billed parents and other account holders for millions of dollars in unauthorized in-app charges incurred by children, according to a Federal Trade Commission complaint filed today in federal court. The FTC’s lawsuit seeks a court order requiring refunds to consumers for the unauthorized charges and permanently banning the company from billing parents and other account holders for in-app charges without their consent.
According to the complaint, Amazon keeps 30% of all in-app charges. In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Amazon violated the FTC Act by billing parents and other Amazon account holders for charges incurred by their children without the permission of the parent or other account holder. Amazon’s setup allowed children playing these kids’ games to spend unlimited amounts of money to pay for virtual items within the apps such as "coins," "stars," and "acorns" without parental involvement.
The complaint alleges that when Amazon introduced in-app charges to the Amazon Appstore in November 2011, there were no password requirements of any kind on in-app charges, including in kids’ games and other apps that appeal to children. According to the complaint, this left parents to foot the bill for charges they didn’t authorize. According to the complaint, kids’ games often encourage children to acquire virtual items in ways that blur the lines between what costs virtual currency and what costs real money.
The complaint highlights internal communications among Amazon employees as early as December 2011 that said allowing unlimited in-app charges without any password was "… clearly causing problems for a large percentage of our customers," adding that the situation was a "near house on fire."
In March 2012, according to the complaint, Amazon updated its in-app charge system to require an account owner to enter a password only for individual in-app charges over $20. As the complaint notes, Amazon continued to allow children to make an unlimited number of individual purchases of less than $20 without a parent’s approval. An Amazon employee noted at the time of the change that "it’s much easier to get upset about Amazon letting your child purchase a $99 product without any password protection than a $20 product," according to the complaint. In July 2012, as set forth in the complaint, internal emails again described consumer complaints about in-app charges as a "house on fire" situation.
The complaint alleges that in early 2013, Amazon updated its in-app charge process to require password entry for some charges in a way that functioned differently in different contexts. According to the complaint, even when a parent was prompted for a password to authorize a single in-app charge made by a child, that single authorization often opened an undisclosed window of 15 minutes to an hour during which the child could then make unlimited charges without further authorization. Not until June 2014, roughly two-and-a-half years after the problem first surfaced and only shortly before the Commission voted to approve the lawsuit against Amazon, did Amazon change its in-app charge framework to obtain account holders’ informed consent for in-app charges on its newer mobile devices, according to the complaint.
According to the complaint, thousands of parents complained to Amazon about in-app charges their children incurred without their authorization, amounting to millions of dollars of charges. The company’s stated policy is that all in-app charges are final and nonrefundable. According to the complaint, even parents who have sought an exception to that policy have faced a refund process that is unclear and confusing, involving statements that do not explain how to seek refunds for in-app charges or suggest consumers cannot get a refund for these charges.
This is the FTC’s second case relating to children’s in-app purchases; Apple, Inc. settled an FTC complaint concerning the issue earlier this year. The Commission is seeking full refunds for all affected consumers, disgorgement of Amazon’s ill-gotten gains, and a court order ensuring that in the future Amazon obtains permission before imposing charges for in-app purchases.