Prime Video Faces Lawsuit for Allegedly Misleading Users About Movie Purchases

Amazon is once again under fire for how it sells digital movies and shows on Prime Video. A new class action lawsuit was filed on Friday in Washington federal court, accusing the company of tricking customers into thinking they truly own the films they “buy.”

According to the complaint, what people actually get is only a license to watch, which Amazon can take back at any time.

The issue of digital ownership has been growing for years across movies, music, books, and games. Unlike DVDs, CDs, or physical books, digital copies often come with hidden terms and conditions.

This means even when someone clicks “buy,” they don’t always keep the product forever. If a company loses distribution rights or shuts down servers, the content can simply vanish.

Gamers know this problem well. In 2023, Ubisoft shut down servers for The Crew, and players suddenly lost access to a game they had already paid for. The backlash sparked the Stop Killing Games movement, which pushes back against publishers taking away titles consumers thought they owned.

Similar frustrations have happened with music services pulling songs from libraries and with ebooks being removed from devices like the Kindle. These situations have reminded many people why physical media still matters. With DVDs or Blu-rays, no company can take the disc away or suddenly revoke access.

The lawsuit against Amazon highlights this problem in the movie and TV world. On its platform, Amazon tells customers they can “buy” a title.

But according to the complaint, the confirmation page hides a small note in fine print: “You receive a license to the video and you agree to our terms.” Lawyer Wright Noel, representing the consumers, said the warning is not clear enough. “The warning is buried at the very bottom of the screen, in font that is considerably smaller than the other text on the screen,” he wrote.

Amazon has faced this before. Back in 2020, a similar case was brought against the company. Amazon argued that its use of the word “buy” wasn’t misleading.

The company even cited Webster’s Dictionary, saying the word could mean paying for the right to use something, not necessarily owning it forever. The court allowed parts of that lawsuit to continue, including a claim under Washington’s unjust enrichment law.

Now, new legal rules could make Amazon’s position weaker. A California law that started this year says companies cannot advertise something as a “purchase” unless customers get true ownership without restrictions.

If the product is only a limited license, sellers must clearly tell buyers and get their acknowledgment. The lawsuit says Amazon has failed to meet this standard.

The case accuses Amazon of violating California laws on unfair competition, false advertising, and consumer protection. The plaintiffs are asking for damages, including profits Amazon earned from these transactions, along with punitive damages for what they describe as intentional misconduct.

Amazon has not responded to the lawsuit, according to reporting from The Hollywood Reporter.

As the legal fight continues, the bigger question remains the same: in the digital world, when you pay to “buy” something, are you really buying it, or just renting it until a company decides otherwise?

Have something to add? Let us know in the comments!