New link here:
http://gigaom.com/2014/03/10/mother-...tual-currency/

A New York woman whose child spent $65.95 on digital “Crystals” has filed a lawsuit on behalf of other parents across the U.S., claiming the Google Play store is full of games and apps that lure children into spending money.

The lawsuit, filed on Friday in San Francisco, claims the woman’s five-year old son spent the money while playing “Marvel Run Jump Smash!” on a Samsung Galaxy tablet, and accuses Google of unjust enrichment and violating consumer protection laws.

The case mirrors a similar case brought against Apple over so-called “bait apps” that are typically free to obtain but encourage users to spend money within the game. Apple paid $5 million to settle the case in 2013 and also paid a related $32.5 million fine early this year.

MODS: if link is not allowed please remove it.
--

Now, I have an android tablet and my 7 years old son plays regularly with it, but I always put the tablet in airplane mode before give it to him.

what do you guys think?

Can't you set it up so purchases require a password your son doesn't know?

These types of stories are always cropping up in the news and nothing ever comes of them.

Quite obviously the parents' fault and lol at them trying to shift the blame over to companies. If you leave your payment details automatically logged and you let your child play with the device, you're an idiot.

What EvilSteve said, it's beyond me why they don't do it.

OP this is not your Facebook.

Lol at letting a 5 year old to use a cellphone. Try doing your job as a parent instead of passing the buck to an electronic device.

This game requires an internet connection to play, apparently. It seems the games all require the player to enter a password to buy something in-game for real money, including this one. The problem is this game doesn't require one for 30 minutes after purchase.


From your article:
Apple long ago closed its 15-minute window during which users could make purchases without entering a password. In the lawsuit against Google, however, the mother claims that the company’s 30-minute purchase window is still open. Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Update: Google has reportedly pushed out an Android update that prompts users for a password at every purchase.

Sounds like an admission of fault to me.

Their reviews just tanked, too -- everyone's pissed off that the new update wiped out their (paid) game histories.


It seems like a scummy business practice and they're aware of it, I'm fine with them being sued.

II:

And from the lawsuit itself:
"Google entices the child with a free or inexpensive (e.g., $0.99) download of a gaming platform that then offers the sale of irresistible Game Currency in order to enjoy the game as it was designed to be “played.” Within seconds of “playing” the game, one is led to a screen that sells virtual currency, so that the “player” can “build” things or “have” other virtual things."

Within seconds! There's no excuse for this and they have it coming.

How does Google know it was a 5 year old on the account? How are the parents going to prove it wasn't one of them on the account who later blamed the child?

I think it probably was the kid fooling around. I also think the parents are idiots who didn't think to supervise their 5 year old when using this software.

However, Google lawyers can still bring up the possibility that the parents are the ones who actually spent the money.

Another classic example of someone not taking responsibility for their own actions and are trying to blame someone else.

worthless parent, let your idiot kid use your phone...

Typical OOT thread where people with kids will understand why this probably is wrong and people without kids won't have any idea what they are talking about and will blame lack of parental responsibility.

I have children (two teens) and I still believe this demonstrates a lack of parental responsibility. There are numerous ways to circumvent this issue and if the parent had used any foresight before this occurred, she wouldn't be sitting there with a bill from Google on her hands.

It's a real issue; the UK seems to be getting serious about kids games like this. There it will be resolved by the might of a government commission, here it will be through class-action suits.




(My Little Pony, ages 4+)




"There's an even higher tier at the very top end of the spectrum for amounts above $50, which Flurry says accounted for 5 percent among the total purchase numbers." [CNET]

Up in that $20 and $50+ range are the kids apps in question. Microsoft found that kids spent an average of £35, and eight-year-olds spend £60. The OP lawsuit gives the example of a game where the kid can buy animal treats for $99.

Even if the parent is an average Farmville player ($0.80 per month) and cognizant of the existence of in-app purchases, they're likely spending about $5. There's no reason for them to assume Habro or Nickelodeon is going to make a Spongebob game to shake them down for $100. At the very least the assumption would be that the game would confirm authorization for such a large amount. It's really weird that anyone would absolve them of responsibility as long as there's a parent to blame instead when it's so clear the industry's business model is premised on exploiting this.

The real issue is human stupidity, an everlasting problem.

How cheap is this bitch too, pay for your damn kids $65 in crystals, she must ****ing hate her kid to be pissed enough over the purchase to open a lawsuit over it.

Oh, look who doesn't have kids!

I mean, my wife and I try to limit any sort of digital screen time as much as possible but there are just going to be times where the kid plays a game or watches a muppet video on our phone.

Big Man, I'm sure you'll be the perfect parent one day though!

lol having a child does not make you capable of superior thought or those without children incapable of logical thought

oh look i don't have kids!

Experience is a mother ****er.

Oh look at the derps without kids being so smart and superior!

"Logical thought" rofl

Pretty sure no one claimed either point. Go back to trolling bfi.

wow overreact much? should phone companies be sued if a child dials a 1-900 number? When I was growing up, my parents would have paid the bill and made sure I understood not to do that again.

If anything the app developer should be shunned if they build a game with too much greed built into it but to act like parents has zero liability here is pretty ridiculous. How about don't save your cc info into your phone for step 1 of personal responsibility? I don't save my info and I don't even have anyone else accessing my stuff.

If sponge bob puts up an ad saying call 1-900-payme to see the episode ending, we are in the same realm. The 900 number analogy is a softball and one lawyers will love.

Overreact would imply you're anything but terrible when you post

Yeah, at least in Australia, whoever there were premium rate numbers advertised on kid tv. It always came with a fixed spiel about asking a parent or guardian. These apps are set up to try and exploit money out of kids...

The parents aren't expected to be perfect and foresee something like this, but it's a cheap lesson learnt. It's the suing of the company that's stupid.

It's morally wrong for the companies to do this, but they shouldn't be sued for it. They're not tricking anyone into paying something.

Lfff

That's what my 11 month old daughter thinks about that.

You used to be able to. But Google changed it so that you enter your password once, it had the nice "feature" of not asking you within the next 15 minutes for your password again. They did nothing to let you know this protection was no longer useful. Give the tablet to my son after purchasing a new game, and he rings up a ton of purchases. We did get it removed, though. Such a pain in the ass.