A federal trial has begun to solve a “friction equation”: Did Amazon illegally add so much friction to its Prime cancellation process that it constituted an unfair business practice? The U.S. government says yes, accusing the company of weaponizing user frustration.
The Federal Trade Commission’s case centers on the “Iliad” flow, which it presents as a masterclass in adding unnecessary friction. The complaint details the four pages, six clicks, and fifteen options that a user had to navigate, a process the government says was intentionally designed to be difficult.
The lawsuit contrasts this high-friction exit with the low-friction entrance. The use of “dark patterns” and one-click sign-ups made joining Prime nearly effortless. The FTC argues that this gross imbalance in friction was a calculated strategy to trap consumers.
This trial is a key test of the emerging legal concept that companies have a duty to provide a cancellation process that is as easy as the subscription process. A ruling against Amazon could help enshrine a “one-click cancel” principle into U.S. consumer protection law.
Amazon is defending its “friction equation.” The company will likely argue that the steps in the cancellation process were not unnecessary friction but important “cooling-off” moments, designed to ensure customers understood the benefits they were giving up.