Amazon has been sued due to introducing Ads

[payn]

The ad decision was the last straw for me. In addition to lack of quality programming, the few things I do like on Prime have been progressively disappointing.

 

[R_J_K75]

The ad decision was the last straw for me. In addition to lack of quality programming, the few things I do like on Prime have been progressively disappointing.

I very rarely even bother looking for anything to watch on Prime anymore. I first subscribed to it somewhere between 2005 and 2007 when it was $30 with a student email address. Now I have no idea what it costs as I'm on a family members membership. I do order a lot of merchandise from Amazon strictly out of convenience because most brick-and-mortar stores usually don't have what I'm looking for. If I were paying for a subscription and didn't shop there as much as I do I'd probably cancel my subscription too. Their shipping has gotten pretty bad too at times, some delivery people are great while others just drive by your house and whip your package out of the truck onto your curb.

 

[payn]

I very rarely even bother looking for anything to watch on Prime anymore. I first subscribed to it somewhere between 2005 and 2007 when it was $30 with a student email address. Now I have no idea what it costs as I'm on a family members membership. I do order a lot of merchandise from Amazon strictly out of convenience because most brick-and-mortar stores usually don't have what I'm looking for. If I were paying for a subscription and didn't shop there as much as I do I'd probably cancel my subscription too. Their shipping has gotten pretty bad too at times, some delivery people are great while others just drive by your house and whip your package out of the truck onto your curb.

What I noticed is that im not a regular amazon shopper. I go through spurts where I order a lot of stuff at one time (usually when I embark on a new hobby). So, it was even less of a hold to keep me. If I ever cant get what I want locally, i'll just do a one month sub and order everything I need, provided its cheaper to do it that way. I think i'll be fine for quite a awhile without amazon.

 

[Ryujin]

Some quick thoughts-

1. This doesn't affect people who are paying for Prime on a monthly basis, of course. But it is my understanding that the vast majority of people are paying for Prime on an annual basis, and as alleged, changing the terms and conditions for those people would be problematic under the causes of action alleged.

2. Next, while Amazon could rightly claim that many people don't even care about the video service that are annual members, I doubt they would even think of raising this argument given the FTC lawsuit ... and the issues they are having with bundling.

3. A brief review of the T&C of prime indicates that it does not have a mandatory arbitration clause, but it does have a venue clause (King County, Washington) where this case was filed (federal court, W.D. Wash.). And while it does have a waiver of jury trial, it doesn't have a waiver of class action. Notably, it does have a provision allowing agreement changes (including any aspect of Prime membership).

While I have questions about the interplay of the underlying claims with contract, in the end I assume that this is just an attempt to leverage a class action to get some amount of money out of Amazon for the class (and, of course, the attorneys) for the change.

California recently ruled against a RV company that was denying warranty claims. The company had a venue clause that stated Ohio and the sale contracts said that all warranty claims had to be sent to the original manufacturer, not the company (seller). Seems the clauses went against California consumer protection laws, so the judge told the seller "too bad."

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I have no clue the difference of laws between state to state let alone the feds. I would think that Amazon being a multi-billion-dollar company they'd have consulted their legal team before implementing these changes. But then again sometimes all it takes is one exec with a little bit of knowledge to make an ill-informed decision, so who knows maybe all of us Prime member might get a check for $2.63 in 10 years.

Maybe they did check, realized what the lawsuit and possible compensation they would have to pay would cost them, and said it's still a good deal?

One thing I am realizing is - I probably don't need Prime for anything, I am stil lin the habit of collecting stuff I want before I make an order. It's mostly a convenience and the occassional prime offering.
What would be a major inconvenience would be losing an account (and the ability to make a new one). Not being able to buy at amazon would be a major hassle. And isn't that a problem?

 

[R_J_K75]

Maybe they did check, realized what the lawsuit and possible compensation they would have to pay would cost them, and said it's still a good deal?

One thing I am realizing is - I probably don't need Prime for anything, I am stil lin the habit of collecting stuff I want before I make an order. It's mostly a convenience.
What would be a major inconvenience would be losing an account (and the ability to make a new one). Not being able to buy at amazon would be a major hassle. And isn't that a problem?

I would not be surprised one bit if they did decide to ignore customers who cancel their Prime subscriptions, make money off the ads and pay off those who sue if they know they are in the wrong.

As far as cancelling your Prime subscription, as far as I know your Amazon account will still be active and you can choose to re-subscribe to Prime whenever you want to.

 

[J.Quondam]

As far as cancelling your Prime subscription, as far as I know your Amazon account will still be active and you can choose to re-subscribe to Prime whenever you want to.

Yep, this is true. I've turned Prime on and off a few times over the years, with no problem for my regular Amazon account.

 

[trappedslider]

Some quick thoughts-

1. This doesn't affect people who are paying for Prime on a monthly basis, of course. But it is my understanding that the vast majority of people are paying for Prime on an annual basis, and as alleged, changing the terms and conditions for those people would be problematic under the causes of action alleged.

the suit covers the monthly people "Subscribers can choose an annual or monthly term, and many subscribers choose the annual term, which is offered at a discount as compared to the monthly term"

I did link the case file

The ones that it would really impact are those subscribers who are getting a discount due to being on Medicare/Medicaid/EBT. The monthly of an additional fee almost wipes out the discount one gets from the aforementioned programs.

 

[R_J_K75]

I did link the case file

I browsed it briefly, but I don't speak legalese.

The ones that it would really impact are those subscribers who are getting a discount due to being on Medicare/Medicaid/EBT. The monthly of an additional fee almost wipes out the discount one gets from the aforementioned programs.

I haven't paid for a Prime subscription in a long time, so I don't know what a monthly or annual one costs now. Did they increase the price as well as adding ads to streaming and that's what would negate the discount for people on medicare/medicaid/and EBT or would that be the additional $2.99/month to remove ads?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

the suit covers the monthly people "Subscribers can choose an annual or monthly term, and many subscribers choose the annual term, which is offered at a discount as compared to the monthly term"

I did link the case file

Um, you know that I can read these documents, right? Difference between allegations that are background and what the suit actually is proposing? That's just background, and further justification for the issues re: annual membership.

Here-

Plaintiff brings the asserted claims on behalf of the proposed class of:

• Nationwide Class: all persons who, while in the United States, within the applicable statute of limitations period and before December 28, 2023, purchased an annual subscription to Amazon Prime.


Any questions?

ETA- there is a legal reason for this as well- if you are monthly, they can change up the terms and conditions on a monthly basis. There isn't the same reliance interest. It's the annual people who have a colorable claim that this isn't the deal they were promised.