On 13 May 2026, the FTC filed and simultaneously settled a lawsuit against online digital photo and video platform Shutterstock, Inc., alleging the company used deceptive "negative option" subscription practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA). Under the stipulated order, Shutterstock does not admit liability but agrees to a permanent injunction and a $35 million monetary judgment for consumer redress.DOCUMENTED
What makes this case notable is the FTC's citation of Shutterstock's own internal communications as evidence — the complaint cites internal emails in which company employees acknowledged that customers "don't realize what they have signed up for," and that a cancellation fee was a "constant source of confusion/frustration" that the company nonetheless implemented and increased as what internal messaging described as a "powerful retention tool."DOCUMENTED
- The FTC alleges Shutterstock misled consumers about its "annual, paid monthly" (APM) plans and on-demand image "packs," and converted free trials into paid annual plans without adequate notice.
- The complaint describes a multi-step, eight-screen online cancellation flow, plus broken or hard-to-find phone and email cancellation options, which the FTC characterizes as unlawful barriers under ROSCA's "simple mechanism" requirement.
- Image "packs" were advertised as "best for a one-time project" with "no commitment," while the complaint alleges the company omitted that packs automatically "refilled" — and rebilled the customer — once the last download was used.
- Under the stipulated order, Shutterstock agrees to a permanent injunction and a $35 million judgment for consumer redress, without admitting liability.
Why internal emails changed the strength of this case
Most deceptive-marketing cases rely on inferring intent from the external design of a product or advertisement — what a reasonable consumer would have understood from the marketing materials themselves. This case is unusual in that the FTC's complaint quotes the company's own internal acknowledgment that its practices were confusing customers, which removes much of the ambiguity that might otherwise exist about whether the confusion was an unintended side effect of complex product design or a recognized, monitored, and ultimately retained business practice.REVIEWED
Customers don't realize what they have signed up for.
The "refill" mechanism as a specific dark pattern
The alleged auto-refill mechanism for image "packs" is a particularly instructive example of subscription dark patterns generally: a product explicitly marketed as a one-time, no-commitment purchase is alleged to have quietly converted into a recurring charge once the customer's initial purchase was fully used — meaning the very act of using the product as intended (downloading all the images in a pack) allegedly triggered the unwanted recurring billing, rather than any affirmative action by the customer.DOCUMENTED
Part of the broader ROSCA enforcement wave
This case sits alongside the FTC's separate actions against Chegg, Instacart, and Uber's UberOne program — all involving allegations that consent, disclosure, or cancellation processes for recurring subscriptions were deliberately or effectively obstructed. Taken together, these cases indicate the FTC currently treats subscription cancellation friction as a distinct, actively enforced category of consumer harm, independent of the specific product or service being sold.
Sources behind this report
Have documents relevant to this story? Reach us through our tips channel.