[flagged]
[1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/10/...
Except that's not the proposed rule. The way this works in California (and the way the rule the FTC recently published works, I believe) is that a business is required to allow customers to cancel "in the same medium" that they subscribed. That doesn't require anyone to start running a website.
The rest of your post is just arguing against something that's not even happening.
Otherwise people who signed up under the wife's name may try to cancel under the husband's name and you don't know who they are, neighbors who don't like the racket from the equipment see your website on the trucks and try to cancel the service even though they're not the customer because you have no authentication, people want to cancel because they've moved and give you their new address instead of the one they're subscribed under, people make ambiguous or incomplete requests and you don't know what they're asking to do. But if you have to contact them to clarify you're not satisfying the requirement that they can cancel via the website.
What do you mean?
You go to the website, it has a form where you fill in your name and address and what service you want. They don't need any further information to send you an invoice. As soon as you pay it, landscapers come to your house and mow your lawn, and then each month you get another invoice until you cancel. That's a subscription; you signed up on the website using the form.
If you have a cancel form it does matter, because it has to match the one used to sign up or they don't know who you are, even if the customer doesn't remember which one they used. Or any number of other issues with matching the request to a subscription.
Humans can sort this out, but then you can't cancel on the website. Computers can also sort this out, but then you need sophisticated programming instead of a basic form. It's not symmetrical.