Cancellation button & transparency: Applause for Microsoft and Starlink in court

In the digital age, a subscription is usually completed with a few clicks. However, the way out of a contract often resembles a technical obstacle course. Two recent rulings by the Regional Courts Munich I and Karlsruhe now emphasize that global tech giants like Microsoft and innovative providers like Elon Musk's Starlink cannot ignore German consumer protection laws. The Consumer Advice Centre Baden-Württemberg was able to achieve victories for user rights in both cases and set clear boundaries for non-transparent practices. The courts are shaking the logic of design tricks like dark patterns, which intentionally make it difficult to exit.

The legal basis for the two decisions is the Law for the Fair Design of Consumer Contracts. It stipulates that subscriptions concluded online must be cancellable via an easily accessible button. The current rulings against Microsoft (Case No. 3 HK O 13796/24) and Starlink (Case No.: 13 O 25/25 KfH) from mid-January make it clear: The judiciary is ready to consistently prevent design tricks to protect consumers' economic freedom.

Microsoft: Login trap and unnecessary data hurdles

The Regional Court Munich I ordered Microsoft to fundamentally change its cancellation practices for services such as the cloud-based Office suite MS 365. Although the US software giant had formally integrated the cancellation button into the footer of the website, it had effectively devalued it through misleading accompanying information. In the tariff descriptions, the company also suggested that cancellation required logging into the Microsoft account. The court considered it particularly critical that users without access to their original email account were thus completely excluded. Those who had lost their login details were trapped in their subscription. The judges made it unmistakably clear here that cancellation must also be possible without prior login to the customer account.

In addition, the 3rd Chamber for Commercial Matters criticized the actual process. Instead of leading the user directly to confirmation, Microsoft inserted an inquiry page. Data such as the order number had to be entered manually. According to the ruling, this artificial barrier violates the requirement of immediacy. A cancellation process must not be used to frustrate users through additional data entry or to unnecessarily prolong the process. Microsoft must now make improvements to meet the legal requirements for transparency and user-friendliness.

Starlink: Lack of transparency in satellite internet

The case against Starlink before the Regional Court Karlsruhe was similar. Here, the judges criticized massive deficiencies already during contract initiation. Information about the identity of the contracting party was only discoverable through detours, which is not permissible in online retail. Another blatant violation concerned the order button, which was only labeled "Place order". German legislation, however, strictly requires that such a button must unequivocally indicate the obligation to pay. A wording such as "order with obligation to pay" can be used for this purpose.

The US provider of satellite internet also showed deficiencies in cancellation, criticized the first Karlsruhe Chamber for Commercial Matters. Instead of a legally compliant button, the menu only offered the option to deactivate the monthly payment. The court found that such a deactivation is not legally equivalent to an effective cancellation.

Taken together, the rulings are groundbreaking for consumer protection. They show that global companies cannot circumvent German law through the country of origin principle. The cancellation button must be a real shortcut to contractual freedom and must not be hidden as an alibi link. Consumer advocates have also repeatedly enforced this against German companies. Oliver Buttler from the Consumer Advice Centre emphasizes that exiting a contract should be as easy as entering it. The rulings are about "very specific everyday situations of thousands of people who lose money or fail due to unnecessarily complicated cancellations".

(nie)