A proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed in Washington federal court, against Amazon, targeting its practice of selling digital movies as “purchases” when customers are actually buying limited-time licences.
The suit alleges that Prime Video misleads consumers into believing they own the content, while access can be revoked at any time. It also refers to past concerns about digital transactions, including the 2023 California gaming controversy where players lost access to The Crew after Ubisoft shut down servers.
The case highlights a broader issue in digital media landscape: what consumers buy online is often not permanent ownership but rather a license to view. For example, a director’s cut of Alien on Prime Video could be replaced with a different version, or removed entirely if Amazon loses the licensing rights.
Critics argue this lack of transparency undermines consumer trust. Lawyers argue that physical media like DVDs still offer a clear ownership model, bypassing the complexities of licensing agreements.
Amazon’s defence in prior legal challenges has relied on the claim that consumers are aware digital content is licensed, not owned, and that its disclosures, often in fine print, are sufficient. However, the new lawsuit contends these notices are not prominently displayed and violate California’s 2025 law requiring clear acknowledgment of revocable licenses.
The complaint alleges violations of California’s unfair competition, false advertising, and consumer legal remedies laws, seeking unspecified damages, including disgorgement of profits and punitive compensation.
Consumer rights lawyers assert that the case could reshape how digital media transactions are marketed, potentially compelling companies to be more transparent about the difference between a purchase and a license.