In 2025, Amazon faced a series of class action lawsuits focusing on its Prime Video streaming service, alleging misleading practices related to digital content ownership, subscription terms, and advertising policies. These lawsuits have highlighted significant consumer frustrations regarding the distinction between licensing and owning digital content, challenges in subscription cancellation, and recent changes to Prime Video’s ad policy.
Misleading Digital Content Ownership Claims
One of the primary class action lawsuits was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, accusing Amazon of deceptive practices by marketing certain movies and TV shows as “purchases” on Prime Video when, in fact, consumers receive only a revocable license. The complaint alleges that Amazon fails to clearly inform customers that access to purchased content can be revoked if Amazon loses the licensing rights, which contrasts with the traditional ownership rights associated with physical DVDs or Blu-rays.
The plaintiffs claim Amazon violated California’s Digital Property Rights Transparency Law, enacted in 2025 to protect consumers from losing access to digital content they believed they owned. The lawsuit points out that such licenses are generally non-transferable, non-sublicensable, and revocable, leading to a “bait-and-switch” scenario where customers pay for permanent ownership but receive a temporary license.
Subscription Cancellation and “Dark Pattern” Allegations
Separately, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a lawsuit against Amazon alleging that the company employed “dark patterns,” design techniques that make it easier for consumers to enroll in Amazon Prime but difficult to cancel subscriptions. The FTC contends that Amazon intentionally obscured the cancellation process by requiring multiple steps and confusing navigation, resulting in unintended renewals and charges.
This lawsuit also resulted in a federal judge sanctioning Amazon for withholding over 70,000 documents during discovery related to the case, emphasizing concerns about transparency. While Amazon denies the allegations, the case underscores widespread consumer efforts to seek remedy for subscription-related grievances.
Prime Video Ads Controversy
In 2024, Amazon announced the introduction of advertisements on Prime Video content unless users paid an additional monthly fee of $2.99 to opt out. This led to a class action lawsuit claiming Amazon misled customers by promoting the service as ad-free and then effectively increasing prices through mandatory ads or paid opt-out fees.
However, in July 2025, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that the introduction of ads was a modification of subscription benefits rather than a price increase. The judge found that Amazon’s terms and conditions clearly allowed the company to change subscriber benefits, and that customers had not been misled in a legally actionable way.
Consumer and Industry Implications
These lawsuits collectively highlight evolving tensions in digital media consumption regarding user rights, corporate transparency, and evolving subscription models. Consumers increasingly demand clarity about what digital purchases entail, their rights to cancel services, and transparency about advertising impacts on paid subscriptions.
For Amazon, the litigation places renewed focus on business practices, regulatory compliance, and customer trust amid growing competition in streaming and e-commerce.
Conclusion
The Amazon Prime class action lawsuits reflect broader challenges confronting digital content providers and subscription services in balancing business objectives with consumer protections. As the cases proceed, outcomes will shape user expectations, regulatory frameworks, and the legal landscape governing digital content ownership, subscription practices, and online advertising.
Consumers are encouraged to remain vigilant in understanding terms of service, monitor subscriptions closely, and participate in ongoing legal developments that aim to enhance digital consumer rights.
