Amazon Unlawfully Seeks to ‘Silence’ Users Who Disparage Company: Class Action

Amazon removed to U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles Friday a class action filed Nov. 23 in Los Angeles County Superior Court in which five plaintiffs allege that the conditions of use that Amazon imposes on consumers to use or shop its platfoms prohibit them from mentioning Amazon or any of its brand names in any manner that “disparages or discredits” the company.

It was the second complaint of its type filed within a month in the same Los Angeles County Superior Court, but by different law firms (see 2312050014).

Amazon’s conduct is in “clear violation” of Section 1670.8 of the California Civil Code and Section 17200 of the California Business and Professions Code, alleged the plaintiffs -- California residents Marcos Ramos, Sahara Antrim, Eldaa Soto, Marisa Barriga and Esme Nicolson-Singh. Amazon “expressly preserves all objections, defenses, and exceptions authorized by law, including those permitted pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” said the company's notice of removal (docket 2:24-cv-00089).

Because of the current power of the internet and social media platforms to publicize a company's offerings of goods or services, Amazon has “significant incentive to minimize the negative publicity" it receives, said the complaint. Some companies, including Amazon, “have gone so far as to attempt to prohibit customers and potential customers from making negative statements about the goods or services they offer,” it said. They do so “to the detriment of consumers, potential consumers, and the public,” it said.

Amazon’s conditions of use threaten that it may terminate users’ rights to access and use Amazon’s platforms if they don’t comply, said the complaint. In so doing, Amazon “seeks to silence its customers from criticizing Amazon using such basic words as the company's own name and core products,” including Alexa, Amazon Prime, Kindle and Whole Foods, it said: “This chilling activity is the precise conduct prohibited by Section 1670.8.”

Amazon’s conduct is unlawful because it’s aimed “to stifle California consumers' right to free speech, and the right of the California public to hear lawful discourse,” said the complaint. Its “strong-arm tactics to silence injured parties were and continue to be intentionally exercised” to protect Amazon’s “self-promoting public image for commercial and other benefits,” it said.

Amazon’s unlawful business practices are “purposefully designed” to “prop” up its stock price, all while denying the public accurate information to “make informed decisions as consumers,” said the complaint. Amazon seeks to have users “waive their rights as consumers” to make negative statements about the company, and further threatens to penalize consumers who refuse to go along, it said.

Those unlawful restrictions are “an important component” of Amazon’s business strategy, which relies on the popularity of Amazon’s product offerings “to generate significant revenues and profits,” said the complaint. But Amazon’s effort to silence its customers “is clearly prohibited by California law,” subjecting the company to “significant penalties,” it said.