Amazon, the world’s largest e-commerce company, is facing one of its most high-profile legal battles yet, as a federal court in Seattle hears a lawsuit accusing the tech giant of systematically misleading millions of customers into signing up for its Amazon Prime subscription—and then making it unnecessarily difficult to leave. The trial, which began on September 22, 2025, is the result of a lawsuit filed by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in June 2023. The FTC alleges that Amazon used deceptive tactics, known in the industry as “dark patterns,” to sign up nearly 40 million customers for Prime, a service that costs $139 per year or $14.99 per month in the United States.
The case, being presided over by Judge John Chun in Seattle, centers on two major allegations: first, that Amazon enrolled customers in Prime without clear consent by employing confusing checkout processes; and second, that the company intentionally designed a complex and frustrating cancellation system, internally referred to as “Iliad”—a nod to Homer’s epic about a long and arduous journey. According to court documents cited by Reuters, Amazon was aware of widespread “non-consensual enrollment” in Prime but resisted making changes that might reduce these unwanted sign-ups, as such changes would negatively affect the company’s revenue.
The FTC’s complaint paints a picture of a checkout experience fraught with pitfalls for the unwary shopper. Declining Prime membership, the FTC claims, required customers to hunt for small, inconspicuous links, while signing up was as easy as clicking a large, prominent button. Key information about Prime’s price and automatic renewal was often buried in fine print or hidden altogether. As the original complaint bluntly put it, “For years, Amazon has knowingly duped millions of consumers into unknowingly enrolling in its Amazon Prime service.”
Prime isn’t just any subscription—it’s the beating heart of Amazon’s consumer business. Launched in 2005, Prime offers free and fast shipping, access to Amazon’s streaming service, and a host of other perks. Today, the program boasts over 200 million members worldwide, according to TipRanks. In the second quarter of fiscal 2025 alone, Amazon reported $12.2 billion in subscription revenues, with Prime members accounting for about three-quarters of all purchases on the platform and spending twice as much as non-members.
But it’s the cancellation process that has drawn the sharpest criticism. The FTC alleges that, until recently, canceling a Prime membership required customers to navigate a “labyrinthine” four-page, six-click, 15-option process. This system, the agency argues, was intentionally designed to frustrate and discourage users from leaving. The lawsuit seeks substantial penalties, refunds for affected customers, and a permanent court order barring Amazon from using misleading subscription practices in the future.
Amazon, for its part, flatly denies the allegations. The company argues that it has always clearly disclosed Prime’s terms and provided customers with simple options to cancel their memberships. In fact, Amazon says it simplified the cancellation process in April 2023, just before the FTC filed its complaint, reducing the number of steps required to end a subscription. The company’s legal strategy hinges on the contention that the laws in question—most notably the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (Rosca), which came into force in 2010—do not specifically prohibit the practices Amazon is accused of. According to TipRanks, Amazon contends that the FTC is stretching the law and that its own improvements to the enrollment and cancellation processes make the case outdated.
Last week, the FTC scored a preliminary victory when a federal judge ruled that Amazon had violated consumer-protection laws by collecting billing information from new Prime subscribers before fully disclosing all the terms of the service. The trial, which is expected to last about four weeks, will rely heavily on internal Amazon communications, executive testimony, and a trove of company documents. If the FTC prevails, Amazon could face hefty financial penalties and be forced to overhaul its subscription practices under court supervision.
At the heart of the case is the Rosca legislation, which specifically prohibits charging consumers for internet services without clear disclosure of terms, obtaining express consent, and providing simple cancellation mechanisms. The FTC alleges that Amazon violated all three requirements by failing to clearly disclose Prime’s terms before collecting payment details, not obtaining genuine informed consent, and making it unnecessarily difficult for customers to cancel.
Despite the legal fireworks, the impact on Amazon’s business may be limited—at least in the short term. Survey data from Consumer Intelligence Research Partners, cited by TipRanks, suggests that about 95% of current Prime members have no intention of canceling their subscriptions anytime soon. And Wall Street appears unfazed: Amazon stock has a “Strong Buy” consensus rating, with an average price target of $264.51, implying a 14.3% upside from current levels. Year-to-date, Amazon shares have gained 5.5%.
Still, the stakes are high—not just for Amazon, but for the entire tech industry. The trial is part of a broader bipartisan push to rein in the power of America’s tech giants after years of what critics describe as government complacency. Judge Chun, who is also presiding over a separate FTC case accusing Amazon of running an illegal monopoly (scheduled for trial in 2027), now finds himself at the center of a legal battle that could set important precedents for how companies design their online interfaces and treat their customers.
The FTC is seeking more than just financial penalties. The agency wants the court to impose permanent injunctions that would force Amazon to change its business practices—potentially requiring the company to make its subscription processes more transparent and its cancellation options far simpler. For consumers, the case raises the broader question: how much control do we really have over the digital services we use every day, and how much responsibility do companies bear for making those choices clear?
Amazon’s defense, meanwhile, is expected to lean heavily on expert witnesses and internal data to argue that its practices were always within legal bounds and that most customers have had no trouble managing their Prime subscriptions. Whether that argument will sway the jury remains to be seen. But as the trial unfolds, the outcome promises to reverberate far beyond Amazon’s Seattle headquarters, shaping how millions of Americans interact with subscriptions online—and how the government polices the digital marketplace.
As the courtroom drama continues, all eyes are on Seattle to see whether the FTC’s case will mark a turning point in the fight for consumer rights in the digital age, or whether Amazon’s defense will preserve the status quo for one of the world’s most influential companies.
