Too tricky to cancel: Amazon faces US trial over alleged Prime subscription deceptions
Briefly

Too tricky to cancel: Amazon faces US trial over alleged Prime subscription deceptions
"Amazon went to trial on Monday in a US government lawsuit that accuses the e-commerce giant of using tricks to enroll millions of customers in its Prime subscription service and then making it nearly impossible to cancel. The Federal Trade Commission's complaint, filed in June 2023, alleges that Amazon knowingly used designs known as dark patterns to deceive consumers into signing up for the $139-per-year Prime service during checkouts."
"The case centers on two main allegations: that Amazon enrolled customers without clear consent through confusing checkout processes, and that it created a deliberately complex cancellation system internally nicknamed Iliad after Homer's epic about the long, arduous Trojan War. The case was heard in a federal court in Seattle by judge John Chun, who is also presiding over a separate FTC case that accuses Amazon of running an illegal monopoly, due to go to trial in 2027."
"Amazon was allegedly aware of widespread nonconsensual enrollment in Prime but resisted changes that would reduce these unwanted sign-ups because they negatively affected the company's revenue. The FTC alleges that Amazon's checkout process forced customers to navigate confusing interfaces where declining Prime membership required finding small, inconspicuous links while signing up for the service was done through prominent buttons."
The Federal Trade Commission alleges Amazon used dark patterns to enroll customers in the $139-per-year Prime service during checkout without clear consent. The complaint states millions were unknowingly enrolled and that crucial details about price and automatic renewal were often hidden or disclosed in fine print. The FTC further alleges Amazon made cancellation deliberately complex via an internal system nicknamed Iliad, requiring navigation of confusing interfaces and inconspicuous links. Amazon allegedly resisted fixes because reducing unwanted enrollments would harm revenue. The case was heard in federal court in Seattle by Judge John Chun amid broader bipartisan legal efforts to rein in big tech.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]