• @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      159 hours ago

      I feel like “the new middle ages” really was a correct description of our time. Well, we’re at the dawn of it. All our universal rights and universal truths are going to be subject to who’s holding the dagger at your throat, and we’ll have theocracies, family republics and feudal lords again. The blooming diversity of hell.

      OK, this is a bit offtopic, just one can see such behavior in all areas today where they wouldn’t be normal 30 years ago.

    • @Skipcast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1613 hours ago

      To be fair to the new owners the previous ones never mentioned the lifetime subscriptions existed and they were sinking the company. Probably the reason the original owners sold in the first place.

      • imecth
        link
        fedilink
        4912 hours ago

        It was obviously a cash grab from the company before fucking off, you can’t reasonably expect a lifetime vpn for 30 bucks. Either it eventually gets repriced, or they start mining all your information like every other “free” vpns.

        • @Akasazh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          99 hours ago

          Yet that was exactly what they sold, this is not too blame in the customer. They built a subscriber base on those purchases which is capital to them.

          They need to uphold the contract that they entered in to.

        • @gradual@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1211 hours ago

          Correct.

          This is just bullshit being said so the owners can make more money.

          Every single person you see who believes it and perpetuates it is a useful idiot.

      • @obvs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        811 hours ago

        That’s not being fair to the new owners.

        It’s the company buyer’s responsibility to make sure they know about and honor existing contracts with the existing company, and it’s the company’s responsibility to provide that information to the buyer.

        It is not ANYONE else’s responsibility to make them follow that. If something like this happens, the company(whether before or after the purchase) was in the wrong.

        • @Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 hours ago

          If the previous owner specifically make sure they do not know about that because they made a quick cash grab, how exactly do you imagine they should know about this?

          • @barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            Not the customer’s problem. Also, fraud.

            But probably failure of due diligence because any seller who’s not a complete idiot would rather let the sale fail and let the company go bankrupt than risk committing fraud.