The benefit of paying for YouTube Premium is watching videos without ad breaks. However, some users are pushing back on the ad-free claim, with a class action complaint filed July 14.
William Flemming and Devin Rose filed the claim against Google and YouTube.
“YouTube Premium is a paid monthly subscription service with a simple value proposition: for a fee, members are offered a streaming experience that is “ad-free” with “no interruptions” during streamed content,” the complaint says. But this promise is hollow. YouTube Premium does not offer an “ad-free” and “uninterrupted” experience. To the contrary, advertisements and interruptions frequently appear during streamed content, interrupting videos with commercials for everything from popular automobiles to marketing for local attorneys or dietary supplements.”
The complaint is referencing sponsored or branded segments embedded in videos by the video creators themselves. The plaintiffs give an example of an ad break during Theo Von’s podcast, when Von breaks from his interview with Kevin James to spend around three minutes promoting Pepsi as part of a brand sponsorship. Another example shared is the YouTuber Kallmekris who interrupts a true crime story to spend around two minutes reading ad copy for Surfshark VPN.
The complaint even calls out creators and artists including Taylor Swift for including promotional links in the video description below the actual video.
The complaint says that YouTube makes it clear that all videos are free of all ads with YouTube Premium. “This message: “Ad-free” and “No interruptions” is reinforced again and again across YouTube’s pages that describe and tout its Premium service,” the plaintiffs say. “YouTube further represents that Premium lets members view “Unlimited ad-free. videos” so they can “Immerse in more of [their] favorite videos without waiting for ads.” These representations—“ad-free” and “no interruptions”—are unambiguous, unqualified, and appear on the very first pages that a prospective Premium member sees after clicking the YouTube Premium link to explore membership options.”
The complaint also points out that YouTube is clear about the difference between YouTube Premium Lite and YouTube Premium. With Premium Lite, the website says that “Most videos are ad-free” while YouTube Premium promises “No ads.”
While those claims are made through the signup process, a YouTube support page has some further clarification, saying “YouTube Music Premium and YouTube Premium members may still see branding or promotions embedded in podcasts by the creator. If added or turned on by the creator, you may also find promotional links, shelves, and other features in and around content. Ads or promotions may also appear on Primetime Channels, or during live events streamed on YouTube, such as sporting events.”
The complaint argues that YouTube is hiding that information and using deceptive wording to make users believe they’ll be getting an ad-free experience. The complaint says “Consumers are deceived if YouTube advertises and sells the Premium service as “adfree,” yet simply re-defines advertisements under a new name—Promotions—without disclosing this in the Premium Terms, or even in YouTube Help. This is simply word games and double talk. Regardless of whether the ad is placed within the video by YouTube or the content creator—the user experience is the same—they are still subjected to annoying ads after paying YouTube to enjoy video content “ad-free.””
Flemming and Rose say that aren’t getting the premium experience they paid for because of the integrated ads in videos. The two are seeking damages on behalf of YouTube Premium subscribers.