Audible class action lawsuit: Difference between revisions

Line 14:

==Background==

[[Audible]] markets audiobooks for “purchase,” yet its legal terms state that consumers receive a '''limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license''' to access content rather than full ownership, and that continued access and re-download are not guaranteed.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-02-18 |title=License Agreement |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2025-09-10 |title=Audible Service Conditions of Use |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com |quote=As a convenience to you we may continue to make your purchased content available for re-download… we do not guarantee that such content will be available for re-download.}}</ref>

[[Audible]] markets audiobooks for “purchase,” yet its legal terms state that consumers receive a '''limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license''' to access content rather than full ownership, and that continued access and re-download are not guaranteed.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-02-18 |title=License Agreement |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250224185607/https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |archive-date=2025-02-24 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2025-09-10 |title=Audible Service Conditions of Use |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250913172910/https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |archive-date=2025-09-13 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com |quote=As a convenience to you we may continue to make your purchased content available for re-download… we do not guarantee that such content will be available for re-download.}}</ref>

In '''California''', the '''Digital Property Rights Transparency Law''' (AB 2426) amended the state’s False Advertising Law by adding '''Business & Professions Code § 17500.6'''. Effective '''January 1, 2025''', sellers may not use terms a reasonable consumer associates with '''unrestricted ownership''' (e.g., “buy,” “purchase”) for digital goods '''unless''' they provide a clear pre-transaction disclosure that the consumer is receiving a license (with a link to the full terms), or obtain the consumer’s affirmative acknowledgment of license restrictions at the time of purchase.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-09-24 |title=AB 2426 (Irwin) – Chapter 513, Statutes of 2024 |url=https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2426/id/2927156 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=LegiScan}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-02 |title=Assembly Committee on Privacy & Consumer Protection: Analysis of AB 2426 (Irwin) |url=https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=California State Assembly}}</ref>

In '''California''', the '''Digital Property Rights Transparency Law''' (AB 2426) amended the state’s False Advertising Law by adding '''Business & Professions Code § 17500.6'''. Effective '''January 1, 2025''', sellers may not use terms a reasonable consumer associates with '''unrestricted ownership''' (e.g., “buy,” “purchase”) for digital goods '''unless''' they provide a clear pre-transaction disclosure that the consumer is receiving a license (with a link to the full terms), or obtain the consumer’s affirmative acknowledgment of license restrictions at the time of purchase.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-09-24 |title=AB 2426 (Irwin) – Chapter 513, Statutes of 2024 |url=https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2426/id/2927156 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=LegiScan}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-02 |title=Assembly Committee on Privacy & Consumer Protection: Analysis of AB 2426 (Irwin) |url=https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250424182400/https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |archive-date=2025-04-24 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=California State Assembly}}</ref>

The '''Federal Trade Commission (FTC)''' has separately warned that platforms must be clear about what consumers actually receive when offered digital products described as “bought” or “purchased,” emphasizing that claims implying ownership when only a license is provided can be deceptive.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-08-01 |title=Can’t lose what you never had: Claims about digital ownership |url=https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>

The '''Federal Trade Commission (FTC)''' has separately warned that platforms must be clear about what consumers actually receive when offered digital products described as “bought” or “purchased,” emphasizing that claims implying ownership when only a license is provided can be deceptive.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-08-01 |title=Can’t lose what you never had: Claims about digital ownership |url=https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231204095939/https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |archive-date=2023-12-04 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>

Courts have also recognized that many digital transactions confer '''licenses''' rather than ownership, limiting first-sale and resale rights (e.g., ''Vernor v. Autodesk'', 9th Cir. 2010; ''Capitol Records v. ReDigi'', 2d Cir. 2018).<ref>{{cite web |date=2010-09-10 |title=Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2010) |url=https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2018-12-12 |title=Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., 910 F.3d 649 (2d Cir. 2018) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/16-2321/16-2321-2018-12-12.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Justia}}</ref>

Courts have also recognized that many digital transactions confer '''licenses''' rather than ownership, limiting first-sale and resale rights (e.g., ''Vernor v. Autodesk'', 9th Cir. 2010; ''Capitol Records v. ReDigi'', 2d Cir. 2018).<ref>{{cite web |date=2010-09-10 |title=Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2010) |url=https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250930230644/https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |archive-date=2025-09-30 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2018-12-12 |title=Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., 910 F.3d 649 (2d Cir. 2018) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/16-2321/16-2321-2018-12-12.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Justia}}</ref>

==Consumer impact and related incidents==

Consumers have reported '''purchased titles becoming difficult to find''' or '''unavailable''' in their libraries when licensing or catalog changes occur. Audible’s own help pages acknowledge “missing title” scenarios and provide steps to locate archived or hidden items.<ref>{{cite web |title=Title is missing |url=https://help.audible.com/s/article/title-is-missing?language=en_US |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible Help Center}}</ref> Independent accounts describe older purchases not appearing in in-app search results after delisting, contributing to confusion when the storefront uses “buy” language but the underlying transaction grants a license.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-05-21 |title=Audible and the strange case of the disappearing audiobooks |url=https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Mike Finn’s Fiction}}</ref>

Consumers have reported '''purchased titles becoming difficult to find''' or '''unavailable''' in their libraries when licensing or catalog changes occur. Audible’s own help pages acknowledge “missing title” scenarios and provide steps to locate archived or hidden items.<ref>{{cite web |title=Title is missing |url=https://help.audible.com/s/article/title-is-missing?language=en_US |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible Help Center}}</ref> Independent accounts describe older purchases not appearing in in-app search results after delisting, contributing to confusion when the storefront uses “buy” language but the underlying transaction grants a license.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-05-21 |title=Audible and the strange case of the disappearing audiobooks |url=https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240525125149/https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |archive-date=2024-05-25 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Mike Finn’s Fiction}}</ref>

This ambiguity reflects a wider '''industry pattern'''. For example, '''Valve/Steam''' added a prominent shopping-cart notice in 2024 stating that a purchase of a digital product '''grants a license''', not ownership.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-10-11 |title=Steam now explicitly states you’re not buying the game, just a license |url=https://www.techspot.com/news/105108-steam-now-explicitly-states-youre-not-buying-game.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=TechSpot}}</ref> '''Sony PlayStation''' initially announced it would remove previously purchased '''Discovery''' TV content due to licensing, then reversed course after public backlash, illustrating that access to “purchased” media may depend on ongoing licensing arrangements outside consumers’ control.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-12-21 |title=PlayStation Video Content (US) legal notice |url=https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/psvideocontent/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=PlayStation}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2023-12-21 |title=Discovery shows you’ve bought on PlayStation actually won’t be taken away |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/21/24011168/sony-playstation-discovery-shows-not-removed |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=The Verge}}</ref> In gaming, '''Ubisoft''' shut down servers for ''The Crew'' (2014), leaving purchasers unable to play and sparking litigation and preservation debates about digital ownership expectations.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-16 |title=Ubisoft is stripping people’s licences for The Crew |url=https://www.pcgamer.com/games/racing/ubisoft-is-stripping-peoples-licences-for-the-crew-weeks-after-its-shutdown-nearly-squandering-hopes-of-private-servers-and-acting-as-a-stark-reminder-of-how-volatile-digital-ownership-is/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=PC Gamer}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-11-04 |title=Ubisoft sued for shutting down The Crew |url=https://www.polygon.com/gaming/476979/ubisoft-the-crew-shut-down-lawsuit-class-action |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Polygon}}</ref>

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ==Background==
-[[Audible]] markets audiobooks for “purchase,” yet its legal terms state that consumers receive a '''limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license''' to access content rather than full ownership, and that continued access and re-download are not guaranteed.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-02-18 |title=License Agreement |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2025-09-10 |title=Audible Service Conditions of Use |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com |quote=As a convenience to you we may continue to make your purchased content available for re-download… we do not guarantee that such content will be available for re-download.}}</ref>
+[[Audible]] markets audiobooks for “purchase,” yet its legal terms state that consumers receive a '''limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license''' to access content rather than full ownership, and that continued access and re-download are not guaranteed.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-02-18 |title=License Agreement |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250224185607/https://www.audible.com/legal/license-agreement |archive-date=2025-02-24 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2025-09-10 |title=Audible Service Conditions of Use |url=https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250913172910/https://www.audible.com/legal/conditions-of-use |archive-date=2025-09-13 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible.com |quote=As a convenience to you we may continue to make your purchased content available for re-download… we do not guarantee that such content will be available for re-download.}}</ref>
-In '''California''', the '''Digital Property Rights Transparency Law''' (AB 2426) amended the state’s False Advertising Law by adding '''Business & Professions Code § 17500.6'''. Effective '''January 1, 2025''', sellers may not use terms a reasonable consumer associates with '''unrestricted ownership''' (e.g., “buy,” “purchase”) for digital goods '''unless''' they provide a clear pre-transaction disclosure that the consumer is receiving a license (with a link to the full terms), or obtain the consumer’s affirmative acknowledgment of license restrictions at the time of purchase.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-09-24 |title=AB 2426 (Irwin) – Chapter 513, Statutes of 2024 |url=https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2426/id/2927156 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=LegiScan}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-02 |title=Assembly Committee on Privacy & Consumer Protection: Analysis of AB 2426 (Irwin) |url=https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=California State Assembly}}</ref>
+In '''California''', the '''Digital Property Rights Transparency Law''' (AB 2426) amended the state’s False Advertising Law by adding '''Business & Professions Code § 17500.6'''. Effective '''January 1, 2025''', sellers may not use terms a reasonable consumer associates with '''unrestricted ownership''' (e.g., “buy,” “purchase”) for digital goods '''unless''' they provide a clear pre-transaction disclosure that the consumer is receiving a license (with a link to the full terms), or obtain the consumer’s affirmative acknowledgment of license restrictions at the time of purchase.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-09-24 |title=AB 2426 (Irwin) – Chapter 513, Statutes of 2024 |url=https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2426/id/2927156 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=LegiScan}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-02 |title=Assembly Committee on Privacy & Consumer Protection: Analysis of AB 2426 (Irwin) |url=https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250424182400/https://apcp.assembly.ca.gov/system/files/2024-03/ab-2426-irwin-apcp-analysis.pdf |archive-date=2025-04-24 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=California State Assembly}}</ref>
-The '''Federal Trade Commission (FTC)''' has separately warned that platforms must be clear about what consumers actually receive when offered digital products described as “bought” or “purchased,” emphasizing that claims implying ownership when only a license is provided can be deceptive.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-08-01 |title=Can’t lose what you never had: Claims about digital ownership |url=https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>
+The '''Federal Trade Commission (FTC)''' has separately warned that platforms must be clear about what consumers actually receive when offered digital products described as “bought” or “purchased,” emphasizing that claims implying ownership when only a license is provided can be deceptive.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-08-01 |title=Can’t lose what you never had: Claims about digital ownership |url=https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231204095939/https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2023/08/cant-lose-what-you-never-had-claims-about-digital-ownership-creation-age-generative-ai |archive-date=2023-12-04 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>
-Courts have also recognized that many digital transactions confer '''licenses''' rather than ownership, limiting first-sale and resale rights (e.g., ''Vernor v. Autodesk'', 9th Cir. 2010; ''Capitol Records v. ReDigi'', 2d Cir. 2018).<ref>{{cite web |date=2010-09-10 |title=Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2010) |url=https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2018-12-12 |title=Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., 910 F.3d 649 (2d Cir. 2018) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/16-2321/16-2321-2018-12-12.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Justia}}</ref>
+Courts have also recognized that many digital transactions confer '''licenses''' rather than ownership, limiting first-sale and resale rights (e.g., ''Vernor v. Autodesk'', 9th Cir. 2010; ''Capitol Records v. ReDigi'', 2d Cir. 2018).<ref>{{cite web |date=2010-09-10 |title=Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 621 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2010) |url=https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250930230644/https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/10/09-35969.pdf |archive-date=2025-09-30 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2018-12-12 |title=Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., 910 F.3d 649 (2d Cir. 2018) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/16-2321/16-2321-2018-12-12.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Justia}}</ref>
 ==Consumer impact and related incidents==
-Consumers have reported '''purchased titles becoming difficult to find''' or '''unavailable''' in their libraries when licensing or catalog changes occur. Audible’s own help pages acknowledge “missing title” scenarios and provide steps to locate archived or hidden items.<ref>{{cite web |title=Title is missing |url=https://help.audible.com/s/article/title-is-missing?language=en_US |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible Help Center}}</ref> Independent accounts describe older purchases not appearing in in-app search results after delisting, contributing to confusion when the storefront uses “buy” language but the underlying transaction grants a license.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-05-21 |title=Audible and the strange case of the disappearing audiobooks |url=https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Mike Finn’s Fiction}}</ref>
+Consumers have reported '''purchased titles becoming difficult to find''' or '''unavailable''' in their libraries when licensing or catalog changes occur. Audible’s own help pages acknowledge “missing title” scenarios and provide steps to locate archived or hidden items.<ref>{{cite web |title=Title is missing |url=https://help.audible.com/s/article/title-is-missing?language=en_US |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Audible Help Center}}</ref> Independent accounts describe older purchases not appearing in in-app search results after delisting, contributing to confusion when the storefront uses “buy” language but the underlying transaction grants a license.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-05-21 |title=Audible and the strange case of the disappearing audiobooks |url=https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240525125149/https://mikefinnsfiction.com/2024/05/21/audible-and-the-strange-case-of-the-disappearing-audiobooks/ |archive-date=2024-05-25 |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Mike Finn’s Fiction}}</ref>
 This ambiguity reflects a wider '''industry pattern'''. For example, '''Valve/Steam''' added a prominent shopping-cart notice in 2024 stating that a purchase of a digital product '''grants a license''', not ownership.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-10-11 |title=Steam now explicitly states you’re not buying the game, just a license |url=https://www.techspot.com/news/105108-steam-now-explicitly-states-youre-not-buying-game.html |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=TechSpot}}</ref> '''Sony PlayStation''' initially announced it would remove previously purchased '''Discovery''' TV content due to licensing, then reversed course after public backlash, illustrating that access to “purchased” media may depend on ongoing licensing arrangements outside consumers’ control.<ref>{{cite web |date=2023-12-21 |title=PlayStation Video Content (US) legal notice |url=https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/psvideocontent/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=PlayStation}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2023-12-21 |title=Discovery shows you’ve bought on PlayStation actually won’t be taken away |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/21/24011168/sony-playstation-discovery-shows-not-removed |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=The Verge}}</ref> In gaming, '''Ubisoft''' shut down servers for ''The Crew'' (2014), leaving purchasers unable to play and sparking litigation and preservation debates about digital ownership expectations.<ref>{{cite web |date=2024-04-16 |title=Ubisoft is stripping people’s licences for The Crew |url=https://www.pcgamer.com/games/racing/ubisoft-is-stripping-peoples-licences-for-the-crew-weeks-after-its-shutdown-nearly-squandering-hopes-of-private-servers-and-acting-as-a-stark-reminder-of-how-volatile-digital-ownership-is/ |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=PC Gamer}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024-11-04 |title=Ubisoft sued for shutting down The Crew |url=https://www.polygon.com/gaming/476979/ubisoft-the-crew-shut-down-lawsuit-class-action |access-date=2025-09-29 |website=Polygon}}</ref>