On January 29, Amazon began inserting ads into Prime Video subscribers' viewing experience. The company announced the change last year, telling customers it would begin showing “limited ads” with movies and shows on its service so it could invest “in engaging content and continue to grow that investment over a long period”. Those who don't want to see ads will have to pay an extra $3 per month. What he didn't say, however, is that it also removes subscribers' access to Dolby features if they choose to stay at the ad-supported tier. The change was first spotted by a German tech publication 4k movie and was confirmed by Forbes.
Forbes I tested it by streaming an episode of Jack Ryan, which has been encoded with Dolby Vision high dynamic range video and Dolby Atmos audio on a TV that supports these technologies. The post revealed that the boxes overlaid above the video confirming Dolby Vision and Atmos are enabled were missing when using an ad-supported account. These boxes appeared as usual when playing with an ad-free account.
This means that customers will have to pay an extra $3 per month on top of their subscription fees if they want to continue playing videos with Dolby Vision and Atmos enabled and don't want their shows and movies to be interrupted by advertisements. To note, Forbes also found that ad-free accounts still have access to HDR10+, which is a technology comparable to Dolby Vision.
Subscribers were unhappy with the change, as expected, enough that a class action lawsuit was proposed. filed against the company in California federal court. The complaint accuses Amazon of violating consumer protection laws and calls its change in terms “deceptive” and “unfair.” He claims that those who have already paid for a one-year Prime subscription expect to enjoy an uninterrupted viewing experience, as Amazon promised. But since they are also affected by this recent development, Amazon “deprives them of the reasonable expectations to which they are entitled”. The class action seeks at least $5 million in damages and asks the court for an injunction “barring” [Amazon’s] deceptive conduct. »