Collecting Email Address's And Paypal TOS

[marklyford]

Hi All

Thought I would share this with you.. After working on our new WSO Kings business we are refining the process of making sure people get updates on products and bonuses etc.

The best way of doing this is by putting an opt in page in between paypal and the download area of the product but I have have been told by some people that this is against Paypal TOS.

Well I called them this morning and had it confirmed that it is NOT against any of their rules to request name and email in this manner.

I have a recording of the call too.

Just thought I would put it out there for everyone as it may be of help to someone

Regards

Mark

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by marklyford

The best way of doing this is by putting an opt in page in between paypal and the download area of the product but I have have been told by some people that this is against Paypal TOS.

Well I called them this morning and had it confirmed that it is NOT against any of their rules to request name and email in this manner.

Hi Mark,

I don't think that, per se, has ever been against PayPal's TOS.

What they do seem to dislike, though (and they've been known to close accounts over it!) is making opting-in a condition of product-delivery if that hasn't been stated on the sales-page.

This seems very understandable, really: it is, after all, a variance of the terms of the contract of sale after payment. Whereas if it's stated openly, of course, it isn't.

I had a client last year, who had been merrily doing this for years: selling a product without specifying in advance that the opt-in was required, and that product-delivery was conditional on it (i.e. it was a contractual term) ... someone objected (for the first time) and PayPal - after verifying that my client was, in fact, doing that - summarily closed down his account and froze his funds for many months, for a "first offence" (or at least a "first complaint" from a customer).

But I'm sure what you've said above is perfectly true: using an opt-in in the way you describe isn't in itself varying the contractual terms after payment, as long as customers are told before paying that they must opt in.

In practice, of course, the potential problem is easily circumvented simply by having an optional opt-in (literally "opting", in other words!), "for product updates and further information", together with an alternative option of "no, thanks, just the download, please" or however one wishes to word it. Simple.

Unless, of course, they've completely changed their policy over this point, since last year. Is that what they told you?

[globalpro]

Mark,

Hold on to that recording. Unless they have changed things, it used to be against their TOS to do that. I know Jon Leger got hit with that when he first rolled out the $7 Secrets report and script. There position at the time was since the buyer had already paid for the product, they couldn't be forced to sign up for anything to get their downloads.

I do know people that have always done this without issue, especially ones that have a good track record, but the couple of times it has come up was by someone complaining to PP without understanding the process. Is why a lot of the popular sales scripts have the buyer added to a list behind the scenes during the sale.

I think it may only become an issue if someone makes it an issue.

Thanks,

John

[marklyford]

interesting guys, I think I will put a notice on my slaes page then I am covered all ways round .

[sbucciarel]

Personally, I hate to have to opt in to receive something I just purchased, and I will never confirm my optin when it is required to download the product. If confirmation is not required, I immediately unsubscribe.

I think there must be a better way to get the email without requiring it for something the buyer has already purchased.

[John Rogers]

There is certainly nothing to stop you from downloading your Paypal history and extracting your customer email addresses from the data.

[Adam X]

Originally Posted by John Rogers

There is certainly nothing to stop you from downloading your Paypal history and extracting your customer email addresses from the data.

Those are not optins.

[John Rogers]

Originally Posted by Adam X

Those are not optins.

Your customers don't have to opt in for you to contact them via email. They have established a business relationship with you by making a purchase which opens the door to communication.

[David McKee]

Originally Posted by John Rogers

There is certainly nothing to stop you from downloading your Paypal history and extracting your customer email addresses from the data.

I was just going to say that - and with the PayPal API you could probably automate it. Then you can just have a simple button for them to opt in for support or newsletters without bugging them with exit pops and the like...

-DTM

[Ben Gordon]

I always knew it wasn't against PayPal's TOS. However, keep that recording, if PayPal ever freezes your account or does anything stupid for that reason, just give them the call you had and you won't have much problems.

Regards,
Ben

[Alexa Smith]

Originally Posted by Ben Gordon

you won't have much problems.

If you'll excuse the observation, Ben, many very longstanding Warriors who have been discussing situations like this, here, for years, especially in the light of threads like this one, may not take much consolation from that theory, entirely logical and reasonable though it may be.

I certainly wouldn't, myself.

Long (and sometimes bitter) experience has taught many here that it can be unwise to rely on such representations from PayPal, even with evidence of them, because it's by no means unknown for them simply to shrug it off by "explaining" later, after the damage is done, that their representative "was mistaken", or whatever. And that doesn't exactly ease one's plight, when one's account has been frozen. With respect, I think you may find the thread linked to just above a rather hair-raising read.

[Johnny Slater]

Alexa, the situation in the thread you link to was a clear violation of the PayPal TOS. The TOS clearly says that you can't sell access to a product that has not already been created. Charging for Webinars that will happen on a future date, which is what was sold in the case of E. Brian Rose, are considered preselling by PayPal and are clearly against the TOS. The entire situation would have been avoided if Brian had read the TOS and not used PayPal as the payment processor for something that they clearly say you can't use them for.

That thread is a far cry from the discussion of optin options after a purchase.

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

If you'll excuse the observation, Ben, many very longstanding Warriors who have been discussing situations like this, here, for years, especially in the light of threads like this one, may not take much consolation from that theory, entirely logical and reasonable though it may be.

[Alexa Smith]

As you can see, Johnny, Brian has asked us not to discuss the details there, at all. I apologise: I probably shouldn't have linked to the thread at all. My fault, please excuse me.

I hear what you say, of course: I'm not alleging that the circumstances were the same, simply that many people here have found, over the years, that it can sometimes be a mistake to rely on information given by PayPal representatives. And for myself (opinion only), having seen what one of my clients went through over the exact issue Mark raises here ... well, you saw my point in my initial reply (post #2): my own feeling is that "easily avoidable problems are best easily avoided". And this one is really easily avoided.

[marcromero]

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

Hi Mark,

I don't think that, per se, has ever been against PayPal's TOS.

What they do seem to dislike, though (and they've been known to close accounts over it!) is making opting-in a condition of product-delivery if that hasn't been stated on the sales-page.

This seems very understandable, really: it is, after all, a variance of the terms of the contract of sale after payment. Whereas if it's stated openly, of course, it isn't.

I had a client last year, who had been merrily doing this for years: selling a product without specifying in advance that the opt-in was required, and that product-delivery was conditional on it (i.e. it was a contractual term) ... someone objected (for the first time) and PayPal - after verifying that my client was, in fact, doing that - summarily closed down his account and froze his funds for many months, for a "first offence" (or at least a "first complaint" from a customer).

But I'm sure what you've said above is perfectly true: using an opt-in in the way you describe isn't in itself varying the contractual terms after payment, as long as customers are told before paying that they must opt in.

In practice, of course, the potential problem is easily circumvented simply by having an optional opt-in (literally "opting", in other words!), "for product updates and further information", together with an alternative option of "no, thanks, just the download, please" or however one wishes to word it. Simple.

Unless, of course, they've completely changed their policy over this point, since last year. Is that what they told you?

Wow that is good information. I cannot believe they froze his funds for just 1 complaint. That's awful

[Frank Donovan]

Hi Mark,

If I understand your OP correctly, you're proposing to ask customers to opt in to receive product updates, not to download the product they've just paid for. Presumably, buyers can decide not to opt in and just continue with their download.

If that's the case, I can't see why PayPal would object as it doesn't interfere with the sales process.

As Alexa pointed out, it's an entirely different matter to make the opt-in a condition of the download, if that requirement isn't clearly mentioned prior to purchase.

I'm sure by your response above that you're more than aware of the difference, but you might be interested in some of the comments in this recent thread about the same subject.


Frank

[David McKee]

Folks, you have to remember that PayPal is not a bank, it is not a credit card company, and currently operates within the same rules/regs as any other large online business. "Caveat emptor" is a good philosophy to take. While I am not one for anti-capitalistic regulations, the fact is there is no enforcement of proper business ethics against a company like PayPal beyond them policing themselves. Banks, on the other hand, have a myriad of regulations that are enforced.

-DTM

[Peggy Baron]

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Personally, I hate to have to opt in to receive something I just purchased, and I will never confirm my optin when it is required to download the product. If confirmation is not required, I immediately unsubscribe.

I think there must be a better way to get the email without requiring it for something the buyer has already purchased.

I'm with Suzanne on this one. It makes me mad to have to optin to something I've paid for just to get it.

If I want a buyer to optin, I'll set up AWeber so it automatically sends them an optin response required message after the sale (but they don't see it as part of the sales process, it just comes as an email later). In that optin email I will explain it's so I can send them product updates, or whatever.

I'd much rather have my optin people as williing participants.

Peggy

[Wally Conger]

Originally Posted by John Rogers

Your customers don't have to opt in for you to contact them via email. They have established a business relationship with you by making a purchase which opens the door to communication.

Are you using Aweber or other autoresponder to make email contact with these purchasing customers, John? Can this be done without an opt-in?