DAZN has found itself in deep waters. The streaming service has exploded in popularity in recent years after HBO and Showtime went out of business. DAZN Boxing is now the go-to pay-per-view service provider for big boxing promotion companies like Matchroom and Golden Boy Promotions.

However, now it finds itself in a class action lawsuit, which claims that DAZN renewed certain subscriptions without making proper disclosures to the customers, bypassing the legal requirements. Kyle McNair-Robinson, a citizen of California, filed a federal lawsuit, which contested that DAZN infringed California’s Automatic Renewal Law without the subscribers’ consent.

What does the lawsuit say?

The 32-page lawsuit argues that DAZN has relied on “consumer confusion and inertia” to ensure its customers stick around, eventually leading to increased revenue. According to the suit, the streaming giant’s lack of clarity and unclear terms about its cancellation policy and the lack of efforts to provide necessary information to the customers before they make the choice is the point of contention. The plaintiff alleges that it goes against California’s laws, which require that online retailers offering subscriptions ensure these things:

1. automatic renewal terms in a “clear and conspicuous manner” whenever the customer requests it
2. affirmative consent before changing the consumer’s mode of payment
3. acknowledgment: stating the clear renewal terms
4. easy cancellation mechanism

The lawsuit maintains that DAZN failed to meet these standards. It further suggests that DAZN “makes it exceedingly difficult and unnecessarily confusing.” How is that happening?

Is DAZN banking on its subscribers’ confusion?

When you try to subscribe to DAZN, two things happen. First, you are given an option to either choose a monthly plan or an annual plan. But if you pick the monthly plan, it renews automatically after the month has ended, and will continue to do so until you make a cancellation request. It’s not something that most fans agree to do when opting for the streaming service.

But you need to give notice of 30 days before you do it. This means that if you’ve only signed up for a one-month subscription, you could end up locked into the DAZN service for an additional couple of months, likely having to pay for the following month as well. The same situation applies to annual subscriptions. As a result, the cancellation process becomes difficult. However, many other streaming platforms also resort to these steps. Is it unlawful though? That is for the courts to decide. So, where does that leave DAZN?

Could it lead to DAZN’s closure?

Most likely, not. It might result in DAZN altering its policies or making the renewable mechanism more transparent, but DAZN is here to stay. In addition, the chances of DAZN paying compensation to the class action lawsuit applicants are also there.

Hence, DAZN and other similar operators in California might have a significant impact, even opening the way for similar future lawsuits or the need to alter their mechanisms and policies. On the contrary, nothing could change. It depends on what transpires inside the court.

What do you make of this class action lawsuit against DAZN? Let us know in the comments below.