Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

Subscription Shake-Up: Navigating the FTC’s Click-to-Cancel Rule

By Baldassare Vinti, Jennifer Yang, Alyson Tocicki & Naomi Caldwell on June 10, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In October 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) updated its 1973 Negative Option Rule to address unfair and deceptive online subscription practices. See 16 C.F.R. § 425 (2024) (the “Negative Option Rule” or the “Rule”). The Rule sparked significant debate, with the original proposal garnering over 16,000 comments. Following some revisions based on this feedback, the Rule went into effect in January 2025. Originally slated for enforcement on May 14, the FTC announced on May 9 that enforcement would be deferred by 60 days, giving businesses until July 14, 2025 to review and comply. This post outlines key aspects of the updated Rule and how companies can reduce legal and reputational risk.

Who Does the Rule Affect: The Negative Option Rule, also known as the “Click-to-Cancel Rule”, implements certain requirements for businesses offering subscription or recurring billing programs. This includes, for example, businesses that offer automatically renewing contracts and subscriptions (e.g., monthly or annual streaming services), free trials that transition into paid subscriptions, and continuity plans with recurring shipments.

How the Rule Works:  The Rule outlines four main requirements:

  • Prohibition on Misrepresentation: Businesses must not mislead consumers regarding any material fact when marketing negative option features.  This includes misleading claims about pricing, cancellation terms, trial periods, or subscription details. 16 C.F.R. § 425.3.
  • Clear and Conspicuous Disclosures: Before obtaining billing information, sellers must clearly and conspicuously disclose all material terms, including the frequency of the recurring payment, the amount they will be charged, and cancellation information.  These disclosures must appear immediately before the request for affirmative consumer consent.  16 C.F.R. § 425.4.
  • Affirmative Consumer Consent: Sellers must obtain express informed consent for negative option programs and their material terms.  This consent must be separate from other general terms and conditions and must be express (e.g. a checkbox that the consumer needs to affirmatively check).  It cannot be inferred through pre-checked boxes, silence, or inactivity. 16 C.F.R. § 425.5.
  • Simple Cancellation Process: Cancellation must be as easy as the sign-up process.  If a consumer can sign up online, they must also be able to easily cancel online, such as via an easy to find, clearly labeled “Cancel Subscription” button. 16 C.F.R. § 425.6.

Interaction with State Law: Businesses should also monitor state laws related to negative option and auto-renewal programs.  The FTC permits states to implement broader protections, and some have incorporated provisions that were not adopted at the federal level.  For example, the California Automatic Renewal Law (effective July 1, 2025) requires businesses to send annual reminders of subscription auto-renewals.  Minnesota’s Updated Automatic Renewal Law (effective January 1, 2025) also mandates annual renewal reminders, and prohibits sellers from presenting additional “save” offers during the cancellation process.

Consequences for Non-Compliance: The stakes for ignoring the FTC’s Negative Option Rule can be high.  The FTC can impose a penalty of $53,088 per violation, with single transactions potentially accruing multiple fines.  Additionally, the FTC may seek court injunctions or consumer refunds, which can be costly and cause reputational harm.  Class actions alleging deceptive auto-renewal practices have also been popular in recent years, and are often premised on alleged failures to comply with FTC negative option requirements or related state laws.

Looking Ahead: The FTC has demonstrated a strong commitment to enforcing consumer protection laws related to negative option programs.  Even before the updated Click-to-Cancel Rule, the agency pursued enforcement actions against companies that it alleged failed to secure clear consumer consent or made cancellation excessively difficult.  Note that the FTC is currently defending a legal challenge to the updated Click-to-Cancel Rule in the Eighth Circuit, with oral argument set for June 10, 2025.  However, absent an adverse ruling in that case before July 14, the new Rule remains set for enforcement beginning on that date.

Businesses should be prepared for continued scrutiny and enforcement efforts in this area, as well as the possibility of an uptick in related class actions.  Proskauer has extensive experience advising clients on compliance with both federal and state laws governing negative option and auto-renewal programs. Our team helps clients implement clear and conspicuous disclosures, obtain valid affirmative consent, and design compliant cancellation processes. In addition, Proskauer regularly defends companies facing FTC investigations, state attorney general enforcement actions, and private litigation. Our renowned Class Action Defense Team are leaders in representing clients in high-stakes consumer protection class actions, including those involving automatic renewal and subscription practices.

Photo of Baldassare Vinti Baldassare Vinti

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti heads Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo’s practice focuses on litigating patent, false advertising, trade secret, life sciences, trademark and contractual matters in federal and state courts and before the International Trade Commission. He is a seasoned trial attorney responsible…

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti heads Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo’s practice focuses on litigating patent, false advertising, trade secret, life sciences, trademark and contractual matters in federal and state courts and before the International Trade Commission. He is a seasoned trial attorney responsible for all aspects of litigation, including Markman hearings, appeals before the Federal Circuit, case preparation and strategy, depositions, motion practice, and settlement negotiations. He has represented clients in high-stakes matters involving a broad range of technologies, including medical devices, diagnostics, immunoassays, prosthetics, pharmaceuticals, dental implants, electronic medical records systems, encryption technology, wound dressings, digital video compression, electronic book delivery and security systems, mobile media technologies, navigation and location-based services, bandwidth management, bar code scanning, lasers , and other technologies. Baldo has represented numerous major corporations, including Arkema S.A., British Telecommunications PLC, Church & Dwight Co., Inc., Henry Schein, Inc., Maidenform Brands Inc., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Ossur North America Inc., Panasonic Corp., Sony Corp., Welch Foods, Inc., and Zenith Electronics LLC.

In addition, Baldo regularly handles transactional work, including intellectual property due diligence, licensing, intellectual property structural transactions, patentability studies, infringement/non-infringement opinions, and client counseling in intellectual property matters.

Baldo is an author and frequent commentator on patent issues pertaining to medical devices and a host of other intellectual property topics, and has been quoted in the National Law Journal, Bloomberg BNA, Law360, Westlaw Journal and Inside Counsel magazine. He is also a regular contributor of articles published in Medical Product Outsourcing magazine that deal with the medical device industry.

Baldo served as a judicial intern for Hon. John E. Sprizzo of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and for Hon. Charles A. LaTorella of the New York Supreme Court.

Read more about Baldassare VintiEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Jennifer Yang Jennifer Yang

Jennifer Yang is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department. She is a commercial litigator with a particular emphasis on false advertising and other intellectual property disputes, including Lanham Act and consumer class action false advertising litigation, advertising challenges before the National Advertising…

Jennifer Yang is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department. She is a commercial litigator with a particular emphasis on false advertising and other intellectual property disputes, including Lanham Act and consumer class action false advertising litigation, advertising challenges before the National Advertising Division, as well as trademark, trade secret and copyright litigation. She has experience representing clients in a variety of industries, including medical device companies, consumer products companies, food and beverage companies, fashion retailers and art foundations.

Jennifer is an author and editor of Proskauer’s advertising law blog, Proskauer on Advertising.

Read more about Jennifer YangEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Alyson Tocicki Alyson Tocicki

Alyson Tocicki is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Trials Practice Group. Alyson handles high-profile and complex litigation matters around the country, with a particular emphasis on product liability, false advertising, and intellectual property disputes.

Alyson has experience…

Alyson Tocicki is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Trials Practice Group. Alyson handles high-profile and complex litigation matters around the country, with a particular emphasis on product liability, false advertising, and intellectual property disputes.

Alyson has experience representing clients at all stages of litigation, including: filing initial pleadings; coordinating discovery; briefing and arguing motions; assisting with key fact and expert witness depositions; writing jury addresses; drafting direct and cross examinations; and preparing witnesses for trial. She regularly represents Fortune 500 companies in the media and entertainment, consumer products, and pharmaceutical industries, as well as professional sports leagues and teams. Alyson leverages her experience to provide creative solutions and to manage her cases with an eye towards trial.

In addition, Alyson devotes significant time to pro bono matters, having been recognized at Proskauer’s 2023 Golden Gavel Awards for her substantial contributions to the Firm’s pro bono efforts. She also serves as a member of the Firm’s Associate Council and was selected to be a Protégée for Proskauer’s Women’s Sponsorship Program, an initiative for high-performing, mid-level lawyers that champions future leaders.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Alyson earned her J.D. from the UCLA School of Law, where she served as a Managing Editor of the UCLA Law Review and President of the Student Bar Association. While in law school, she also earned multiple Masin Family Academic Excellence Awards, advised first-year students on legal research and writing, and worked as a judicial extern for the Honorable Robert N. Kwan in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California.

Read more about Alyson TocickiEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Communications, Media & Entertainment
  • Blog:
    Proskauer on Advertising Law
  • Organization:
    Proskauer Rose LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo