Australia's Case Against Amazon: What the Prime Video Ad Dispute Means for Subscribers
Australia's consumer regulator has launched legal action against Amazon over changes to its Prime Video subscription model. The case centres on allegations that subscribers were not adequately informed about the introduction of advertisements and the requirement to pay an additional fee for an ad-free experience.
- Tech News
- 2 min read
;'%3e%3cpath%20d='m8,15.99c4.41,0,7.99-3.58,7.99-7.99S12.41,0,8,0,0,3.59,0,8s3.58,7.99,7.99,7.99Z'%20style='stroke:%23fff;%20stroke-miterlimit:10;%20stroke-width:.02px;'/%3e%3cpath%20d='m3.08,3.37l3.82,5.11-3.84,4.15h.87l3.37-3.64,2.72,3.64h2.94l-4.04-5.39,3.58-3.87h-.86l-3.1,3.35-2.5-3.35h-2.94Zm1.27.64h1.35l5.97,7.99h-1.35l-5.97-7.99Z'%20style='fill:%23fff;'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e){kind=small}
Australia's competition watchdog has taken Amazon's local unit to court, and the reason comes down to one thing- money customers already paid versus a service that changed without warning.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) says Amazon Australia built unfair terms into its contracts with annual Prime subscribers. The regulator claims the company then used those very terms as a backdoor to bring advertisements onto Prime Video, affecting changes for over a million subscribers between November 2023 and August 2025, with zero compensation offered.
ACCC alleges Amazon AU packed multiple unfair clauses into its subscriber contracts, then relied on some of them specifically to introduce ads.
Why Customers Feel Cheated
Annual Prime subscribers had already paid around A$79 (roughly $54) upfront, expecting a full year of ad-free streaming as part of the deal. Then in July 2024, Amazon started showing ads on Prime Video anyway. If subscribers wanted to keep watching without interruptions, they had to pay an extra A$2.99 every month essentially paying twice for something they thought they'd already secured.
Advertisement
For the ACCC, that's the unfair part- locking people into a yearly payment, then changing the terms of what that payment covered, without giving them anything back.
Why the US Parent Company Is Named Too
The lawsuit doesn't stop at Amazon's Australian unit. The ACCC alleges that Amazon.com Services LLC, the US-based entity, was also "knowingly concerned" in the conduct, claiming it helped draft the Australian contracts containing these terms. This widens the case beyond a local subsidiary issue and ties the parent company directly to the allegations.
Advertisement
The ACCC says it began looking into Amazon's contracts after receiving a flood of consumer complaints once ads first started appearing on Prime Video in 2024. Those complaints became the basis for building the broader case now headed to court.
The regulator is seeking formal court declarations against Amazon, financial penalties, compensation for affected customers, legal costs, and other orders it considers necessary.
Amazon's Response
A spokesperson for Amazon Australia told Reuters the company is reviewing the case "in detail" and emphasised it had cooperated with the ACCC's investigation throughout.
At its heart, this case isn't just about ads on a streaming platform, it's about whether a company can change what a subscription includes after customers have already paid for it, and then charge them again to get back what they originally signed up for. The outcome could influence how subscription services handle similar mid-contract changes in the future.