The adequacy of Amazon’s fine print and subscription disclosures is now the subject of a federal trial. The U.S. government is suing the company, alleging that crucial information about the Prime service—such as its $139 annual price and automatic renewal—was deliberately obscured from consumers.
The Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit claims that while Amazon used large, prominent buttons to encourage sign-ups, the actual terms of the deal were hidden in small, hard-to-read text. This practice, the government argues, violates laws requiring clear and conspicuous disclosure of key subscription terms.
This trial moves beyond the visual trickery of “dark patterns” to the legal requirements of contract formation. The FTC is arguing that no valid agreement can be formed if the essential terms are not presented in a way that a reasonable consumer can see and understand them.
This case could have significant implications for how online businesses present their terms and conditions. A victory for the FTC could force companies to abandon the practice of burying important details in fine print and instead present key information, like price and renewal terms, upfront and with equal prominence to the “subscribe” button.
Amazon’s defense is that its disclosures have always been legally adequate. The company will argue that the information was always available to consumers who chose to look for it and that it is not responsible for users who fail to read the terms of a service before signing up.