Please note that all submissions to the site are subject to the wiki's licence, CC 4.0 BY-SA, as found here

Honey browser plugin controversy: Difference between revisions

From Consumer Action Taskforce
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
m Corrected typo
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= The Honey Browser Controversy =
==Background:==
*[[Capital One]] faces a nearly identical lawsuit for the same practices. It appears as though this may be an “industry standard” predatory tactic that is more pervasive across coupon extensions en masse which may merit its own page. It may be the case that '''most''' coupon-searching browser extensions behave identically in this regard.


== Quick Introduction & Background: ==
*CapitalOne faces a nearly identical lawsuit for the same practices. It appears as though this may be an “industry standard” predatory tactic that is more pervasive across coupon extensions en masse which may merit its own page. It may be the case that '''most''' coupon-searching browser extensions behave identically in this regard.


[[PayPal Honey|Honey]] is owned by [[PayPal]], which was recently featured in a few online investigations for its business practices. It is a tool that you can install in your [[wikipedia:Web_browser|web browser]] ([[Google Chrome]], [[Mozilla Firefox]], [[Microsoft Edge]], [[Safari]], etc.), and it claims to work by “searching the web” to find its user the best coupon code available for an item the user is shopping for online.


Honey is owned by PayPal and was recently featured in a few online investigations for their business practices.
Honey states that it works by looking at the checkout page of an online store and searching the internet to find a coupon code for that website, finding and testing discount codes for your item. The implication is that if it is unable to find a better coupon code, one does not exist. Honey, however, has been found to often not find the best coupons and deals for its users.  


It is a tool that you can install to your [[wikipedia:Web_browser|web browser]] (Google Chrome, FireFox, Edge, Safari etc.) and it states to work by “searching the web” to find you the best coupon code available for an item a person with the extension is shopping for online.
==Victim group 1: consumers==
Honey promises consumers that it will “search the web” for the “best deals available”. What it actually does in practice is search its own databases (a list of coupons) for coupon codes.<!-- citation needed, and maybe reword for neutrality --> In some cases, Honey finds a code and tells the end user. There is no guarantee, however, that Honey actually found that user the “best” discount code. On some occasions, Honey does manage to find discount codes that business owners never meant to make publicly available<!-- cit needed -->. More often than not,<!-- citation needed, or remove quantitative claim --> however, Honey will “search the web” and tell the end user ‘sorry, there are no eligible coupon codes we could find’. This level of inconsistency makes it hard to trust Honey to do the job they promise to do. Further searches for lawsuits with similar claims leads to a very similar suit against Capital One regarding similar practices, contributing to what may be a pattern among these "coupon-finding" browser extensions.<!-- Instead of 'furtehr searches for...', just state the existence of other lawsuits, and reference appropriately -->


'''Honey states''' that it works by looking at the checkout page of an online store and searches the internet to find a coupon code for that website, finding and testing discount codes for your item, and states that if it can’t find one, it doesn’t exist on the internet.
==Victim group 2: business owners and digital storefronts==
 
Additionally, PayPal offers business owners a program where they can partner with Honey, for a monthly fee (PayPal makes money). Business owners who choose to pay this “protection money” receive a guarantee that Honey will only show the discount codes they want it to show. There are documented instances of business owners finding what they thought were 'private' or 'one-time' discount codes being used by Honey users, building a strong incentive to "formally partner" with Honey and give PayPal its protection racket.
However, Honey has been found to often not find the best coupons and deals for its users.
 
== Victim Group 1: The Consumers ==
Honey promises consumers that they will “search the web” for the “best deals available”. What they actually do in practice is search '''their own databases''' (lists of coupons) for coupon codes.<!-- citation needed, and maybe reword for neutrality --> In some cases, Honey finds a code and tells the end-user. There is no guarantee, however, that Honey actually found that user the “best” discount code. On some occasions, Honey does manage to find discount codes that business owners never meant to make publicly available<!-- cit needed -->. More often than not,<!-- citation needed, or remove quantitative claim --> however, Honey will “search the web” and tell the end user ‘sorry, there are no eligible coupon codes we could find’. This level of inconsistency makes it hard to trust Honey to do the job they promise to do. Further searches for lawsuits with similar claims leads to a very similar suit against Capital One regarding similar practices, contributing to what may be a pattern among these "coupon finding" browser extensions.<!-- Instead of 'furtehr searches for...', just state the existence of other lawsuits, and reference appropriately -->
 
== Victim Group 2: Business Owners & Digital Storefronts ==
Additionally, PayPal offers business owners a program where they can partner with Honey, for a monthly fee (PayPal makes money). Business owners who choose to pay this “protection money” receive a guarantee that Honey will only show the discount codes the business wants them to show.
There are documented instances of business owners finding what they thought were 'private' or 'one-time' discount codes being used by Honey users, building a strong incentive to "formally partner" with Honey and give PayPal their protection racket.


<!-- Needs changing/rewording to be understood without describing tony soprano - these kinds of analogies may be used in theme articles, but are not appropriate elsewhere -->
<!-- Needs changing/rewording to be understood without describing tony soprano - these kinds of analogies may be used in theme articles, but are not appropriate elsewhere -->
In a layman comparison, this is like somebody walking into a sporting goods store and saying, “Hey, if you pay me $19.00 a month, I’ll have someone make sure your customers only ever see sale tags that you want them to see. If you don’t, I’m going to have those same guys look through your entire inventory, all day, every day, and tell customers exactly how they can pay you as little as possible”.  
In a layman comparison, this is like somebody walking into a sporting-goods store and saying, “Hey, if you pay me $19 a month, I’ll have someone make sure your customers only ever see sale tags that you want them to see. If you don’t, I’m going to have those same guys look through your entire inventory, all day, every day, and tell customers exactly how they can pay you as little as possible”.  


== Victim Group 3: Online Marketing Affiliates (often, "Content Creators") ==
==Victim group 3: online marketing affiliates  and ontent creators==


<!-- Whole thing needs rewording to sound less like a journal piece -->  
<!-- Whole thing needs rewording to sound less like a journal piece -->  
PayPal has largely marketed the Honey browser extension via paid advertisements inside of Youtube, TikTok, and other social media video platforms. This is a strong marketing avenue for them, as most people watch that content in a browser, making it easier to install (generating more users for Honey than, say, advertising on cable television). On its face, this is a very common practice and a means of reaching a very broad audience. But behind the scenes, Honey has been sneaking away with those same creators’ commission checks for products they recommend to their audience. There is a technical explanation to this linked below; this section will cover Honey’s practices at a fairly high level for ease of understanding.
<!-- (This is the rewording) -->
 


Affiliate marketing is a revenue-sharing model in which individuals or entities (affiliates) partner with companies to earn money for advertising goods and services. This is done through the use of personalized links to track which affiliate sent which customers to an online store. If a customer makes a purchase using an affiliate link, the affiliate whose link was used gets a commission on the sale.


<!-- Needs changing/rewording to be understood without describing a electronics store -->
Honey disrupts this practice by replacing an existing affiliate link with their own on the checkout page, whenever a customer interacts with the extension in search of coupons. It does this even when it is unable to find a coupon for the customer. When the customer makes their purchase, Honey takes credit for the sale and gets the commission.
Picture yourself in a big-box electronics store. You ask a staff member for help choosing a television and sound system. The staff member is knowledgeable, helpful, and puts in a genuine effort to educate you about not just which product costs the most money, but which product actually fits your needs the most appropriately. Before you check out, the salesperson gives you a ticket with their name to show at the checkout counter, as they make a commission on products they sell you. You’re happy because you have an opportunity to make an educated purchase thanks to the help of the salesperson, and the salesperson gets a small commission for educating you and closing the sale.  


<!--Needs changing/rewording to be understood without describing a electronics store  -->
The Honey extension was largely advertised by content creators on [[YouTube]] as well as other social-media platforms. Affiliate marketing can make up a significant portion of a content creator's revenue. Most of the influencers who promoted Honey were unaware of its practices and thus unknowingly promoted a browser extension that poaches their affiliate revenue. Estimates of "stolen" revenue are upwards of 5 million USD. The discovery of Honey's practices has led to a [[class action lawsuit|class-action lawsuit]] launched by Wendover Productions.
When you get to the cash register, you find that the cashier is not a Big Box Store employee, but works for PayPal. The Honey representative tells you that, before you check out, they can search their system to see if they can find you a coupon, to save you even more money. This sounds great! You get to make an educated purchase, knowing that your item is the best for your needs, and you are going to pay as little as possible! What the Honey cashier did not tell you, is that they’ve replaced the Big Box Store’s employee commission slip with PayPal’s. Whether they find you a coupon or not, Honey steals the commission from the person who worked hard to know about the product and spent time and effort to sell you that product. All of their work is made irrelevant and their commission goes to PayPal, a massive corporation who will apparently stoop to a level of pettiness that belongs in a high school lunchroom.


* ''It is this practice in particular that has attracted legal attention, as several of Honey’s victims in this instance are/were attorneys who create content about legal controversies (such as LegalEagle and America’s Attorney). They have documented their view on the lawsuit here: https://honeylawsuit.com/''<!-- this is a very partisan source - we shouldn't be saying 'find out more' and then linking to one half of a lawsuit. Instead, try and find some media source which has a reasonable detail of reporting on the lawsuit.
*''It is this practice in particular that has attracted legal attention, as several of Honey’s victims in this instance are or were attorneys who create content about legal controversies (such as LegalEagle and America’s Attorney). They have documented their view on the lawsuit here: https://honeylawsuit.com/''<!-- this is a very partisan source - we shouldn't be saying 'find out more' and then linking to one half of a lawsuit. Instead, try and find some media source which has a reasonable detail of reporting on the lawsuit.


In general though, we shouldn't even be saying to the reader 'hey, do this!' in any capacity -->
In general though, we shouldn't even be saying to the reader 'hey, do this!' in any capacity -->


== Sources/Links:<!-- needs reworking into a proper references section. also, not appropriate to signppost people to join a class action. have edited the introduction to the link to reflect this -->==
==Sources/Links:<!-- needs reworking into a proper references section. also, not appropriate to signppost people to join a class action. have edited the introduction to the link to reflect this -->==


* Link to the formal class action filing: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/5:2024cv09470/441974
*Link to the formal class action filing: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/5:2024cv09470/441974
* Louis Rossman's video explaining the scandal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksjzI-8Rz2w
*Louis Rossmann's video explaining the scandal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksjzI-8Rz2w
* Original “Breaking” story by creator MegaLag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc4yL3YTwWk
*Original “Breaking” story by creator MegaLag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc4yL3YTwWk
* LegalEagle explanation of their class action lawsuit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H4sScCB1cY&pp=ygUVaG9uZXkgc2NhbmRhbCBsYXdzdWl0
*LegalEagle's explanation of their class action lawsuit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H4sScCB1cY


[[Category:PayPal]]
[[Category:Incidents]]
[[Category:Incidents]]

Latest revision as of 10:16, 23 January 2025

Background:[edit | edit source]

  • Capital One faces a nearly identical lawsuit for the same practices. It appears as though this may be an “industry standard” predatory tactic that is more pervasive across coupon extensions en masse which may merit its own page. It may be the case that most coupon-searching browser extensions behave identically in this regard.


Honey is owned by PayPal, which was recently featured in a few online investigations for its business practices. It is a tool that you can install in your web browser (Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Safari, etc.), and it claims to work by “searching the web” to find its user the best coupon code available for an item the user is shopping for online.

Honey states that it works by looking at the checkout page of an online store and searching the internet to find a coupon code for that website, finding and testing discount codes for your item. The implication is that if it is unable to find a better coupon code, one does not exist. Honey, however, has been found to often not find the best coupons and deals for its users.

Victim group 1: consumers[edit | edit source]

Honey promises consumers that it will “search the web” for the “best deals available”. What it actually does in practice is search its own databases (a list of coupons) for coupon codes. In some cases, Honey finds a code and tells the end user. There is no guarantee, however, that Honey actually found that user the “best” discount code. On some occasions, Honey does manage to find discount codes that business owners never meant to make publicly available. More often than not, however, Honey will “search the web” and tell the end user ‘sorry, there are no eligible coupon codes we could find’. This level of inconsistency makes it hard to trust Honey to do the job they promise to do. Further searches for lawsuits with similar claims leads to a very similar suit against Capital One regarding similar practices, contributing to what may be a pattern among these "coupon-finding" browser extensions.

Victim group 2: business owners and digital storefronts[edit | edit source]

Additionally, PayPal offers business owners a program where they can partner with Honey, for a monthly fee (PayPal makes money). Business owners who choose to pay this “protection money” receive a guarantee that Honey will only show the discount codes they want it to show. There are documented instances of business owners finding what they thought were 'private' or 'one-time' discount codes being used by Honey users, building a strong incentive to "formally partner" with Honey and give PayPal its protection racket.

In a layman comparison, this is like somebody walking into a sporting-goods store and saying, “Hey, if you pay me $19 a month, I’ll have someone make sure your customers only ever see sale tags that you want them to see. If you don’t, I’m going to have those same guys look through your entire inventory, all day, every day, and tell customers exactly how they can pay you as little as possible”.

Victim group 3: online marketing affiliates and ontent creators[edit | edit source]

Affiliate marketing is a revenue-sharing model in which individuals or entities (affiliates) partner with companies to earn money for advertising goods and services. This is done through the use of personalized links to track which affiliate sent which customers to an online store. If a customer makes a purchase using an affiliate link, the affiliate whose link was used gets a commission on the sale.

Honey disrupts this practice by replacing an existing affiliate link with their own on the checkout page, whenever a customer interacts with the extension in search of coupons. It does this even when it is unable to find a coupon for the customer. When the customer makes their purchase, Honey takes credit for the sale and gets the commission.

The Honey extension was largely advertised by content creators on YouTube as well as other social-media platforms. Affiliate marketing can make up a significant portion of a content creator's revenue. Most of the influencers who promoted Honey were unaware of its practices and thus unknowingly promoted a browser extension that poaches their affiliate revenue. Estimates of "stolen" revenue are upwards of 5 million USD. The discovery of Honey's practices has led to a class-action lawsuit launched by Wendover Productions.

  • It is this practice in particular that has attracted legal attention, as several of Honey’s victims in this instance are or were attorneys who create content about legal controversies (such as LegalEagle and America’s Attorney). They have documented their view on the lawsuit here: https://honeylawsuit.com/

Sources/Links:[edit | edit source]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php?title=Honey_browser_plugin_controversy&oldid=4740"