FTC Sues Amazon Over Prime Users Enrollment

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint Wednesday against Amazon for its Prime subscriptions, specifically how that system makes it hard to know when the signup process is actually occurring as well as creating barriers to exit when a user wants to unsubscribe.

Though much of the FTC’s filed complaint is redacted, the key charges remain visible. The summary of the case reads as follows:

“For years, Defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”) has knowingly duped millions of consumers into unknowingly enrolling in its Amazon Prime service (‘Nonconsensual Enrollees’ or ‘Nonconsensual Enrollment’). Specifically, Amazon used manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs known as ‘dark patterns’ to trick consumers into enrolling in automatically-renewing Prime subscriptions.”

The complaint defines “dark patterns” as manipulative design elements custom-tailored to trick consumers into making decisions they wouldn’t have gone through with if options had been transparently presented.

Specific instances of dark patterns include Amazon obscuring the location of the option to purchase items without a Prime subscription, as well as utilizing a transaction completion button that failed to clearly state that by clicking the button, users were enrolling in a recurring Prime subscription.

The filing states Amazon was internally aware of the “nonconsensual enrollment” problem, though further details surrounding that statement have been redacted. The filing says some Amazon employees attempted to get company executives to address the nonconsensual enrollment issue and fix it.

The FTC’s complaint also notes that Amazon’s Prime cancellation process was internally named “Iliad,” a reference to Homer’s epic and a direct nod to the arduous nature of attempting to cancel a subscription.

“Under significant pressure from the Commission—and aware that its practices are legally indefensible—Amazon substantially revamped its Prime cancellation process for at least some subscribers shortly before the filing of this Complaint,” the filing reads. “However, prior to that time, the primary purpose of the Prime cancellation process was not to enable subscribers to cancel, but rather to thwart them.”

When asked for comment by TheWrap, an FTC spokesperson pointed toward the Commission’s press release on the matter.

Amazon response via a spokesperson was as follows:

“The FTC’s claims are false on the facts and the law. The truth is that customers love Prime, and by design we make it clear and simple for customers to both sign up for or cancel their Prime membership. As with all our products and services, we continually listen to customer feedback and look for ways to improve the customer experience, and we look forward to the facts becoming clear as this case plays out. We also find it concerning that the FTC announced this lawsuit without notice to us, in the midst of our discussions with FTC staff members to ensure they understand the facts, context, and legal issues, and before we were able to have a dialog with the Commissioners themselves before they filed a lawsuit. While the absence of that normal course engagement is extremely disappointing, we look forward to proving our case in court.”

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint Wednesday against Amazon for its Prime subscriptions, specifically how that system makes it hard to know when the signup process is actually occurring as well as creating barriers to exit when a user wants to unsubscribe.

Though much of the FTC’s filed complaint is redacted, the key charges remain visible. The summary of the case reads as follows:

“For years, Defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”) has knowingly duped millions of consumers into unknowingly enrolling in its Amazon Prime service (‘Nonconsensual Enrollees’ or ‘Nonconsensual Enrollment’). Specifically, Amazon used manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs known as ‘dark patterns’ to trick consumers into enrolling in automatically-renewing Prime subscriptions.”

The complaint defines “dark patterns” as manipulative design elements custom-tailored to trick consumers into making decisions they wouldn’t have gone through with if options had been transparently presented.

Specific instances of dark patterns include Amazon obscuring the location of the option to purchase items without a Prime subscription, as well as utilizing a transaction completion button that failed to clearly state that by clicking the button, users were enrolling in a recurring Prime subscription.

The filing states Amazon was internally aware of the “nonconsensual enrollment” problem, though further details surrounding that statement have been redacted. The filing says some Amazon employees attempted to get company executives to address the nonconsensual enrollment issue and fix it.

The FTC’s complaint also notes that Amazon’s Prime cancellation process was internally named “Iliad,” a reference to Homer’s epic and a direct nod to the arduous nature of attempting to cancel a subscription.

“Under significant pressure from the Commission—and aware that its practices are legally indefensible—Amazon substantially revamped its Prime cancellation process for at least some subscribers shortly before the filing of this Complaint,” the filing reads. “However, prior to that time, the primary purpose of the Prime cancellation process was not to enable subscribers to cancel, but rather to thwart them.”

When asked for comment by TheWrap, an FTC spokesperson pointed toward the Commission’s press release on the matter.

Amazon response via a spokesperson was as follows:

“The FTC’s claims are false on the facts and the law. The truth is that customers love Prime, and by design we make it clear and simple for customers to both sign up for or cancel their Prime membership. As with all our products and services, we continually listen to customer feedback and look for ways to improve the customer experience, and we look forward to the facts becoming clear as this case plays out. We also find it concerning that the FTC announced this lawsuit without notice to us, in the midst of our discussions with FTC staff members to ensure they understand the facts, context, and legal issues, and before we were able to have a dialog with the Commissioners themselves before they filed a lawsuit. While the absence of that normal course engagement is extremely disappointing, we look forward to proving our case in court.”