The FTC’s Surprisingly Weak Case Against Amazon
from the i-expected-better dept
Way back in 2005 I wrote about the launch of Amazon Prime, talking about the trade offs of joining this “shipping club” as I called it then. If you look at that post now, it has nearly 600 comments. However, the first comment didn’t even get added until over a year after I posted the story. When I first wrote about it, it was such a non-story that we got zero comments on it (admittedly, BestNetTech was a bit smaller then and a lot of our stories at the time got few, if any, comments).
So why does it now have nearly 600? Because a year later someone commented, complaining about how they had somehow accidentally signed up for Amazon Prime, and were furious that they had been charged $79. And, then, somehow, that post must have shown up in Google searches for users angry that they had accidentally signed up for Prime without knowing it. For the next ten years or so, when people were angry about having accidentally signed up for Prime, many of them would… come to a single 2005 BestNetTech post to bitch about it in the comments.
It was a bit weird.
But, either way, it gave me some level of awareness that some people have been “tricked” into signing up for Amazon Prime.
So, when the FTC recently sued Amazon for tricking users into signing up for Amazon Prime and making it hard to cancel, I figured they must have some pretty good evidence of bad practices. Coupled with the fact that FTC boss Lina Khan built her reputation largely on the back of a paper arguing that the FTC needed to take down Amazon, and people have been perplexed that the FTC under her leadership had not gone after Amazon, it seemed natural to assume that the eventual case against the company would be really solid. Also, while some of the earliest cases her FTC has filed have been incredibly weak, some of the more recent filings (including against Google) have been much stronger, actually zeroing in on what appear to be legitimate issues. So, again, I expected the case against Amazon to be fairly strong.
But then I read it. And… I’m confused.
There are a few things in the complaint that narratively sound bad — like Amazon employees referring to the cancelation setup as “Iliad” — but the details really seem like extremely nitpicky about UI decisions, many of which are defensible.
Now, there’s a ton of stuff redacted in the complaint, so perhaps under those blacked out lines there is stronger evidence of truly nefarious behavior. But, what’s shown really just doesn’t seem that crazy.
I should be clear, by the way, I’m not a Prime customer, and have magically avoided getting tricked into using Prime for pretty much my entire time using Amazon. I have (on multiple occasions) done free trials of Prime, but never felt unwittingly sucked into paying for it when those trials were over. I might be more tech savvy than your average Amazon shopper, so I’m not saying that my experience applies to everyone, but at the very least, it seems entirely possible to not get suckered into paying for Prime if you don’t want it. I know that because I’ve done it.
Anyway, part of what surprised me is that the complaint basically admits that Amazon is pretty upfront about the deal, saying that after a free trial you have to pay a monthly fee:
A lot of what the FTC is complaining about is that the small text part of the deal is, well, in small text. But… that’s been the way things have kinda always worked? Is small text now against the law?
Could Amazon be even more upfront? Sure. But would it really change that much?
Given the number of sneaky hidden fees we see from telcos and broadband providers and tons of other companies, it would seem like that would be a much bigger and better target for this type of action, rather than “Amazon tells you the details, but puts it in smaller text below the offer.”
As Elizabeth Nolan Brown points out in an analysis of the case, it relies on claims that Amazon’s design uses “dark patterns.” But “dark patterns” basically is a term that is being used when someone doesn’t particularly like the way a website is setup. The complaint talks about small print and interstitials and standard upsell offers. Are some of those annoying? Sure. But, annoying isn’t illegal, nor should it be.
Again, with so much of the complaint blacked out, I have to assume there’s something more serious behind the redaction bars. Because, even though I was sympathetic to the idea that this could be a good case, and that Amazon was up to no good, what’s in the unredacted portion of the lawsuit just seems like “gee, we don’t like how Amazon tries to upsell Prime.” But not liking something doesn’t mean it violates the law.
Filed Under: amazon prime, cancellation, deceptive practices, fine print, ftc, lina khan
Companies: amazon
Comments on “The FTC’s Surprisingly Weak Case Against Amazon”
Just call them. Seriously.
One thing I haven’t seen anyone report on is that Amazon — yes, AMAZON – has excellent telephone support. The number is hard (if not impossible) to find on their website, but a simple google search finds it immediately, and the service there is top notch. I’ve called multiple times with issues over the years and instantly was connected to an English-speaking person who solved my problems.
I can’t think of another Big Tech company with comparable service.
So while I’d like to see Amazon execs in prison for selling counterfeit goods and other fake sales/advertising, whining about accidental Prime sign-ups by illiterate Karens doesn’t seem to be the best place for the FTC to spend its energy.
Re:
It’s kind of important to make sure the phone number you get is actually Amazon’s number. So, here’s a page on Amazon.com that shows the North American toll-free number.
The international number is comparatively hidden, mostly appearing in comments posted by Amazon sellers. I only found one official-looking page listing it.
“For the next ten years or so, when people were angry about having accidentally signed up for Prime, many of them would… come to a single 2005 BestNetTech post to bitch about it in the comments.
It was a bit weird.”
On the internet no one knows you’re a dog. And, you live forever…
Accessibility
I disagree that “dark patterns” are merely annoying…
When you take accessibility in to account, “dark patterns” can go from being an annoyance to being discriminatory in nature.
i think i agreed to a Prime trial twice, knowing full well i would cancel it. The second time, last summer, it was insanely difficult to find a way to actually cancel. i mean, it should be right in you account settings.
Not that i would just give up if i couldn’t find it on the site. But it is annoying and should be disallowed.
As for FTC litigation, tho’… seriously there must be better things over which to bring a suit, and there must be someone there who can do a better job of it. Unless that isn’t what they actually want.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
The alternate view is just that Linda Khan and all the current FTC is a anit-business racket, and all the nominees BestNetTech has ever supported for gov office are awful, in general.
OMG I didn’t look at what I was doing, ignored the email welcoming to prime, all of the 2 day shipped items I got, none of this would lead me to believe that I had indeed signed up for Prime!
And then when I went to quit, it was like HARD.
Of course the part of the story I leave out is how I was demanding they refund me for several months where I got the benefits but wasn’t aware I had to pay for them.
As with anything online signing up is a click, ending the service is not just a single click and OMG that should be illegal!!!
I have never accidentally signed up for Prime and I get things from Amazon more than I should.
Does the prime pushing bother me, a little but its a company and they exist not to send me my widget but to get paid.
There are so many “odd” things I do on Amazon that others in my alleged family have never considered doing.
I’ll pay 12 cents more for something shipped from the Amazon warehouse than the seller… I always get my stuff timely… funny that.
I actually look at the price thats like $20 cheaper to find the magical $45 shipping price… I don’t buy that one.
Are these people complaining about Prime also demanding that grocery stores change their layout so that they don’t get tempted with impulse buys?
If the FTC really wanted to help the public, they’d force Amazon to get a search that works.
Re:
You’re implying that an e-mail from a company saying you’ve been signed up for a service somehow counts as consent? To me, that seems like something people ought to know before it happens, and I’ll leave it to the lawyers to show evidence that either the customers were frickin’ idiots, or Amazon was being deceptive.
In either case, it’s still a bad customer experience to be surprised in this way. From the point of view of those customers, it’s more like an item being slipped into their card (and charged for) than an impulse buy.
Re: Re:
Did you have to try very hard to ignore what I said to try and shovel it into your comment?
If you got an email saying welcome to Prime after you ‘accidentally’ pressed the button accepting Prime, you really can not pretend you didn’t know it happened.
As Prime is usually pitched as a free trial, one could ask why they didn’t try to end the trial sooner if they accidentally pressed the button.
I still wonder how many of these “complaints” are from people who, in the words of Judge Judy, ate the steak & now that the bill is due want to pretend it was a bad steak.
“that either the customers were frickin’ idiots, or Amazon was being deceptive.”
WhyNotBoth dot gif.
See also: Mikes opening tidbit about how people show up to complain in the comments on an article from 2005 about the launch of Prime. Because posting a comment on a website that isn’t part of Amazon or the Government (despite what some regulars claim) shows an uncanny understanding of how the world REALLY works.
“In either case, it’s still a bad customer experience to be surprised in this way. From the point of view of those customers, it’s more like an item being slipped into their card (and charged for) than an impulse buy.”
The text talking about the free Prime trial isn’t exactly in 2pt font 47 clicks away.
As for a bad customer experience… if you have allergies and do not make the restaurant aware of them & they serve you your allergen you expect a multimillion dollar settlement?
Also if you buy a toilet seat on Amazon, why is it that Amazon keeps offering to sell you another toilet seat??
That seems like a bad customer experience as toilet seats aren’t an item most people want to setup a subscription to get delivered every month.
With all of the scams and horrible things online, ‘I wasn’t paying attention and clicked to get a Prime trial & then waited to do something about it’ seems like a waste of FTC resources. The nation that makes identity theft victims have to defend their credit, prove they didn’t take out that loan, and still sometimes end up on the hook for the costs… but we’re devoting resources to is ‘accidentally’ getting prime & it being hard to end. Seems about right.
It's a lot easier than other places
I’ve also signed up for several Prime free trials, and I agree that it was a bit challenging to find the cancellation, I will give Amazon credit where credit is due; they let you cancel immediately, and still continue the trial to the end.
At least as of the last time I had a trial, I could sign up for a free trial, cancel immediately, and still enjoy prime for the full trial period! Nobody else does that. If you cancel, you’ll free trial, it stops the moment you cancel it, almost everywhere.
Small text being enforcable would be nice actually.