[ibaikov]

I wonder if that's actually illegal, because it feels very close to false ads etc. It seems legal, but I think courts would side with customers.

As if google would say that yes, emails are $5/mo, but there's actually a limit on number of emails daily, and also number of characters in the email. It just feels so illegal to nerf a product that much.

Same with AI companies changing routing and making models dumber from time to time.

[aspenmayer]

If there is a material difference in the product that causes you to no longer feel that it's the same as it was when you subscribed, it could be considered a bait and switch? I think as soon as you notice that this is the case, you should probably stop paying them though, otherwise you might seem to accept this state of affairs. If you had a long term contract that didn't have some kind of language that tried to prevent this from happening in the first place, you could probably get out from under that contract by saying that the deal has essentially changed out from under you, but I think a lawyer might make that argument much better than me.

I'm not sure what harm you think you're suffering from, and what a proper remedy might be, if you think it's illegal. I don't know if I would go that far, as there are all kinds of words most terms of service use to somehow make it so that you have already acknowledged and agreed to whatever they decide to do. So a lawyer will probably be helpful there as well.