Online subscription after a trial: reviewing the button and cancellation route

A trial can be free, discounted or offered for a nominal amount. The legal assessment turns on the contract model shown in the same ordering journey. If the customer enters an open-ended or longer subscription from the start, the later price forms part of that model. The trial changes the timing or amount of the first charge.

Under section 2 UWG, advertising must not create an impression that conflicts with the later contract data. A large “free trial” message combined with a monthly price hidden in a difficult-to-find text can distort the overall impression. The review covers the headline, price, term, renewal, cancellation conditions and the path to the final click.

Businesses should use a consistent version across the advertisement, landing page, basket, checkout and confirmation. The existing article on preselected add-ons addresses a related ordering issue: every price-relevant choice must remain visible to the customer.

Section 8(2) FAGG requires a button for a paid online contract to make the payment obligation clear. Wording such as “order subject to payment” or “buy” identifies the final step. A button saying “Register”, “Continue” or “Join” leaves open whether a binding paid contract is created.

The button wording must be reviewed together with the summary immediately before the order. This includes the service, total price or calculation, duration or minimum term and the conditions for ending the contract. A clear button cannot cure missing or contradictory information elsewhere in the process.

If the button does not comply, the customer’s liability under the paid contract may be disputed. That question is separate from a later dispute about notice periods. The exact screen shown on the order date matters because providers can change texts and buttons after the event.

A fixed-term subscription renews automatically under section 6(1)(2) KSchG only when specific conditions are met. The renewal must be agreed in the original contract. Before expiry, the provider must separately draw attention to the impending renewal and the opportunity to object. The customer also needs a reasonable period in which to object.

A reference in the terms supplied at sign-up is not automatically enough. The pre-renewal message must make the consequence of silence understandable. The Supreme Court decision 7 Ob 52/17y treats the agreement, notice and opportunity to object as connected requirements that must be reviewed together.

This differs from a subscription that is open-ended or longer-term from the beginning and merely starts with a trial period. The key question then is whether price, term and cancellation were clear at sign-up. The article on UWG cease-and-desist notices covers the response to a later challenge.

Customers need to know how an online subscription can be ended. Section 4 FAGG requires information about the duration, minimum term and cancellation conditions for open-ended or automatically renewing contracts. These details must be accessible before the contract and remain available in the contract confirmation.

The button solution concerns formation of the contract and the payment obligation. It is not a general Austrian cancellation button. For an Austrian subscription, review the agreed cancellation route, its continued accessibility and the date on which the notice reaches the provider. Changing links, broken functions or unnecessary technical barriers can create a separate transparency problem.

Withdrawal and ordinary cancellation serve different purposes. Withdrawal under the FAGG can provide a statutory route within the applicable period, while ordinary cancellation usually takes effect at the contractually agreed date. The notice should identify the intended legal route, date and subscription reference.

The version of the journey on the order date is central. Save the advertisement, landing page, price display, terms link, checkout and final button as screenshots or PDFs. Add the confirmation email, payment record, start of use and later messages about renewal or cancellation.

Technical details may also matter. Preserve the URL path, language, checkboxes, error messages and access time. A cancellation attempt should be recorded with sending time, confirmation, response and any later charge in one chronology.

When a charge is demanded, the communication should identify the specific issue. Separate an unclear order step, an ineffective renewal, a cancellation problem and a refund request. The advertising claims tool helps organise visible claims and evidence, but it does not replace contract review.

A common mistake is to market the trial as a standalone free offer even though a longer subscription is concluded at registration. The post-trial price, minimum term and cancellation route must remain understandable throughout the same journey. A detail hidden in an obscure document creates avoidable misleading-practice risk.

Another problem is a button that sounds like a non-binding registration. A paid contract needs a clear final step. The provider must then issue a storable contract confirmation with the relevant data. Later reliance on the current website does not prove what the customer saw at the time.

For customers, confusing withdrawal with ordinary cancellation causes practical problems. Review the contract, price, term and deadline first. Use the prescribed channel, preserve proof of receipt and respond to a charge with a clear account of the specific issue.

Providers should test the complete subscription journey. The advertisement, order button, price summary, contract confirmation, cancellation function and pre-renewal messages should be reviewed with one documented test case. Text and process changes should be versioned so the relevant history remains available.

Customers should build one chronology from the advertisement, click path, contract text, confirmation, charges, cancellation notice and provider response. The desired outcome should be clear: immediate release, ending at the next date, repayment or clarification of continued use.

A competition-law challenge can concern the design used for many customers as well as the individual contract. The topic page on injunctions and interim relief explains protective aims and evidence. The article on hidden additional costs addresses a related transparency risk.