A federal judge has dismissed a class-action lawsuit against Amazon that claimed the company deceived Prime Video users by introducing advertisements unless they paid an additional monthly fee. The decision ends months of litigation over Amazon’s controversial change to its streaming service.
U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, ruling from the Western District of Washington on July 16, granted Amazon’s motion to dismiss the consolidated class-action complaint with prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs cannot try again.
Amazon’s right to modify upheld
Central to the court’s ruling was the finding that Amazon had not violated its terms of service. Judge Rothstein referenced a previous ruling that determined the introduction of ads was not a price increase but rather a “benefit modification” — a change the company was authorized to make under the membership agreement.
Amazon’s terms, the judge emphasized, gave the company sole discretion to add or remove Prime membership benefits at any time. “Amazon never promised — to Prime members or anyone else — that Prime Video would be always, or entirely, ad-free,” the company stated in its legal filings.
Plaintiffs’ claims ruled unreasonable
The plaintiffs had argued that Amazon’s move amounted to a “bait and switch,” misleading customers who believed ad-free streaming was a guaranteed feature of their Prime membership. The lawsuit, originally filed in February 2024, said customers were unfairly forced to pay an additional $2.99 per month to maintain ad-free streaming, something they had already paid for.
Judge Rothstein was not persuaded. She ruled that it was not reasonable for customers to assume that Prime Video’s ad-free model would remain unchanged. The decision criticized the plaintiffs for relying on personal expectations rather than the language of Amazon’s user agreement.
This ruling marks the third time the plaintiffs have attempted to bring similar claims against Amazon. Judge Rothstein noted that each version of the complaint failed to present new or viable legal theories and therefore denied any further opportunity for amendment.
“[T]his is Plaintiffs’ third attempt to plead viable claims,” Rothstein wrote. “No further amendment will be permitted.”
Background and impact
Amazon began rolling out ads on Prime Video content in early 2025, offering users an option to pay $2.99/month to continue watching without commercials. The change sparked widespread customer backlash and legal scrutiny.
Despite customer frustration, the court’s ruling affirms that Amazon’s service agreements allow for such changes. The decision is a major legal win for Amazon and sets a precedent for subscription-based platforms seeking flexibility in adjusting their service offerings.
