Roku class action overview:
- Who: A consumer filed a class action lawsuit against Roku Inc.
- Why: The plaintiff claims Roku removed a key feature from its Smart Home Cameras, forcing customers to pay for a subscription to access it.
- Where: The Roku class action was filed in California federal court.
Roku is facing a new class action lawsuit alleging the company removed a key feature from its Smart Home Cameras, forcing customers to pay for a subscription to access it.
Plaintiff Louis Moses filed the class action complaint against Roku on March 5 in California federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer protection laws.
According to the class action lawsuit, Roku launched its Smart Home Cameras in October 2022, marketing them as devices that could send users motion alerts and provide access to still images of detected motion or sound without a subscription.
However, in July 2025, Roku quietly removed the Motion Snapshots feature from all its cameras, the lawsuit alleges. This means that users without a subscription can no longer review what motion or sound triggered the alert unless they purchase a Roku subscription.
Roku’s actions ‘dishonest and unfair,’ lawsuit claims
Moses argues that Roku’s actions are “dishonest and unfair,” and that the company improperly coerced customers into purchasing a subscription to maintain the utility of their cameras.
“Had Plaintiff and other purchasers known that they would lose access to this feature, they would not have purchased Roku Cameras, or would have paid significantly less for them,” the Roku class action lawsuit says.
The lawsuit claims that Roku’s conduct has been widely criticized by consumers, with many expressing their frustration on online forums and social media.
Roku’s removal of the Motion Snapshots feature has left many customers with “significantly less useful” cameras, the class action lawsuit says.
The lawsuit alleges that Roku’s actions constitute a deceptive practice known as “software tethering,” where manufacturers use software updates to render devices less functional or obsolete, forcing consumers to buy new products.
Moses is looking to represent anyone worldwide who purchased Roku Smart Home Cameras before July 16, 2025, and still owned the device on or after that date. He is suing for breach of contract, breach of implied warranties, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, breach of quasi-contract, unjust enrichment and trespass to chattels.
He is seeking certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial, along with a court order blocking Roku from engaging in the allegedly unlawful conduct.
Last year, Florida sued Roku, alleging it violated the state’s Digital Bill of Rights by selling children’s personal information without parental consent.
What do you think of the claims made in this Roku class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.
The plaintiff is represented by Sophia G. Gold and Jeffrey D. Kaliel of KalielGold PLLC and Phillip M. Black of Wolf Popper LLP.
The Roku class action lawsuit is Moses v. Roku Inc., Case No. 3:26-cv-01422, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
One thought on Roku class action alleges cameras lost functionality without paid subscription
Vivant does the same thing. charged me $5,000 for cameras but i cant even access them without a paid subscription.