Brenda Spoonemore, an Amazon Business vice president, opens up about what vendors are facing in today’s economy on ‘The Claman Countdown.’
A new class-action lawsuit accuses Amazon of misleading consumers into believing they own movies they “buy” on its platform, when in reality the films that they’ve purchased can disappear at any time.
Unlike physical media, such as a DVD or Blu-ray, movies bought on Amazon’s platform are not owned in perpetuity. Customers are actually buying a limited license to stream the films, and, should Amazon lose the rights to carry the movie on its platform, the media would simply vanish from the customer’s library, The Hollywood Reporter noted.
The lawsuit, filed in Washington state federal court, alleges Amazon engaged in a “bait and switch” on consumers by leading them to believe they are buying a movie and failing to sufficiently disclose that they are merely purchasing a license to stream the media, which is revocable at any time.
Amazon is being sued for allegedly misleading customers. (KAZUHIRO NOGI/AFP via Getty Images / Getty Images)
AMAZON EXPANDS SAME-DAY DELIVERY SERVICE TO INCLUDE PERISHABLE FOOD ITEMS IN OVER 1,000 CITIES
“When one ‘buys’ a hard-copy DVD of the Director’s Cut of Django Unchained, they ‘own’ it. They can place the DVD in the shelf below their TV stand, and rest assured the DVD will not vanish into thin air with the passage of time,” the lawsuit states. “If they wish to view the movie 5 or 10 years later, they can plug the DVD into their DVD player, the Director’s Cut of the movie will still play. The same cannot be said when one ‘buys’ Django Unchained on APV.”
“If Amazon loses the rights to the Director’s Cut of the movie, Amazon might replace it with a different cut of the movie (such as the theatrical cut, which has 30 minutes of footage removed). And if Amazon loses the rights to the movie altogether, it will disappear from the consumer’s digital library.”
The suit claims that Amazon is in violation of a law signed by Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom in January, which requires digital stores to inform customers that they are purchasing the rights to stream content, and not the content itself.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images / Getty Images)
The bill came in response to consumer backlash that manifested as the “Stop Killing Games” movement, which targeted videogame makers like Ubisoft and Playstation, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
Ubisoft provoked gamers’ ire after shutting down servers hosting their popular online-only racing game “The Crew,” and revoking players’ licenses to stream the game last year. These actions removed the game from their libraries completely. Playstation threatened to remove Discovery content from their users’ libraries, even if they’d “purchased” the shows, only to later walk back the move.
AMAZON ALERTS CUSTOMERS ABOUT IMPERSONATION SCAMS
“When consumers ‘buy’ digital versions of audiovisual works through Amazon’s website, they do not obtain the full bundle of sticks of rights we traditionally think of as owning property. Instead, they receive [a] ‘non-exclusive, nontransferable, non-sublicensable, limited license’ to access the digital audiovisual work, which is maintained at Defendant’s sole discretion,” the lawsuit states.
Consumers who “buy” movies on Amazon are really just paying for a license to stream. (Getty Images / Getty Images)
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Amazon was previously sued in 2020 over similar allegations that it failed to provide consumers with a sufficient understanding of what they were purchasing. The streamer argued that its terms of use clearly state that the content purchased by a consumer may one day disappear. A judge rejected Amazon’s bid to throw out the case.
Fox News Digital reached out to Amazon for comment.
