`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 1 of 17
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`
`
`NO.
`
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
` DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`MARY AND MATTHEW STREET,
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`v.
`
`AMAZON.COM SERVICES, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation; AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES,
`INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 2 of 17
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`Plaintiffs Mary and Matthew Street (“Plaintiffs” and/or the “Street Plaintiffs”), on their
`own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated (“Class Members”), bring this class
`action against Amazon.com Services, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc. (collectively
`“Amazon” or “Defendants”) and complain and allege the following upon personal knowledge
`as to their own experiences, and based upon on information and belief as to other matters:
`INTRODUCTION
`1.
`Amazon is building an unprecedented national wireless network but making its
`consumers foot the bill. This action seeks to right that wrong.
`2.
`This is a class action lawsuit brought against Amazon by Plaintiffs individually,
`and on behalf of similarly situated consumers who purchased Amazon Echo smart speakers and
`Ring security camera systems equipped with Amazon’s Sidewalk network (referred to herein as
`“Sidewalk Devices”).
`3.
`Amazon manufactured, marketed, and sold the Echo and Ring devices.1
`Embedded within Sidewalk Devices is a technology that enables those Sidewalk Devices to
`connect to other Echo and Ring devices nearby through their Bluetooth connections, creating a
`new, shared network.2 Together, these connections create a stronger “mesh” network with long-
`range connectivity that would otherwise be expensive to create.
`4.
`Amazon bypasses the expense of creating such an expensive network, however,
`by having Sidewalk tap into Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ private Internet connections, using
`portions of their Internet bandwidth to maintain connections between the Sidewalk Devices.
`
`
`1 Geoffrey A. Fowler, Amazon is about to share your Internet connection with neighbors. To
`turn it off, you’ll have to dig through some settings, WASHINGTON POST, (June 8, 2021, 11:07
`AM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/06/07/amazon-sidewalk-network/,
`https://apple.news/AP7vHVBq5SseZ-9EkFrmT3w.
`2 Id.
`
`COMPLAINT - 1
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 3 of 17
`
`
`
`5.
`Amazon activated Sidewalk on or about June 8, 2021, automatically connecting
`its Sidewalk Devices by default without first seeking consumers’ consent to share their Internet
`bandwidth.
`6.
`As a result of Amazon’s unfair, deceptive, and/or fraudulent business practices,
`owners of Sidewalk Devices, including Plaintiffs and Class Members, have suffered an
`ascertainable loss and injury in fact; are at imminent risk of future harm, including increased
`risk to the security of their personal data; and otherwise have been harmed by Amazon’s
`conduct.
`7.
`Accordingly, Plaintiffs bring this action, on behalf of themselves and the Class,
`to redress Amazon’s violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, RCW §§
`19.86.010, et seq., and RCW § 9A.56.262. Plaintiffs seek monetary relief for damages suffered,
`costs of suit, including reasonable attorney fees and public injunctive relief.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`8.
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
`§ 1332 of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 because: (i) there are 100 or more class
`members, (ii) there is an aggregate amount in controversy exceeding $5,000,000, exclusive of
`interest and costs, and (iii) there is minimal diversity because at least one plaintiff and one
`defendant are citizens of different states. This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over the
`state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
`9.
`Venue properly lies in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because
`a substantial portion of the conduct described in this Complaint was carried out in this district.
`Furthermore, Amazon is headquartered and has a principal place of business in this district,
`subjecting Defendants to personal jurisdiction in this district.
`10.
`The Court may exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they
`maintain headquarters within this judicial district; are registered to conduct business in this
`judicial district; have designated an agent for service of process in this judicial district; have
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 2
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 4 of 17
`
`
`employees located in this judicial district; list their address as within this judicial district; and
`intentionally and purposefully placed its products and services into the stream of commerce
`within the state of Washington and throughout the United States. The exercise of personal
`jurisdiction over Defendants in Washington would not offend traditional notions of fair play
`and substantial justice.
`
`THE PARTIES
`11.
`Plaintiffs Matthew and Mary Street are husband and wife, and citizens of the
`state of Florida, residing in Miami-Dade County.
`12.
`On or about October 9, 2018, Mr. and Mrs. Street became owners of an “Echo
`Dot,” third generation, for personal, family, or household use.
`13.
`The Street Plaintiffs pay Comcast for personal Internet bandwidth on a monthly
`
`basis.
`
`14.
`The Street Plaintiffs did not consent to share their personal Internet bandwidth for
`the Sidewalk network.
`15.
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants
`Amazon.com Services, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc. are incorporated in the state of
`Delaware and maintain their business headquarters at 410 Terry Ave N, Seattle, WA 98103.
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`16.
`Defendant Amazon.com Services, Inc. is “a vast Internet-based enterprise that
`sells books, music, movies, housewares, electronics, toys, and many other goods, either directly
`or as a middleman between other retailers and Amazon.com’s millions of customers.”3
`17.
`Amazon.com Services Inc.’s Prime delivery and streaming services exceed 200
`million global customers.4
`
`
`3 Mark Hall, Amazon.com, BRITANNICA, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Amazoncom (last
`visited June 25, 2021).
`4 Fortune 500: Amazon – Rank 2, FORTUNE, https://fortune.com/company/amazon-
`com/fortune500/ (last visited Jun 25, 2021).
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 3
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 5 of 17
`
`
`
`18.
`Amazon.com Services Inc. has grown from being an online book retailer to the
`world’s largest and most influential e-commerce platform with net sales of more than $280
`billion in 2019.5
`19.
`Defendant Amazon Digital Services Inc.’s “business includes renting data
`storage and computing resources, so-called ‘cloud computing,’ over the Internet.”6
`20.
`Amazon Digital Services Inc. is now also one of the largest providers of cloud
`computing services, powering 42% of the Internet through Amazon Web Services.7
`21.
`In January 2019, Amazon became “the most valuable company on the planet,”
`worth almost $810 billion.8
`22.
`Amazon also developed the voice-controlled, personal, artificial intelligence,
`assistant technology known as Alexa.
`23.
`The Alexa application allows users the ability to connect to online music
`services, provide weather and news updates, and view shopping lists and calendars, among
`other services.
`24.
`The Amazon Echo is a platform for Alexa. Its voice-controlled smart speaker
`connects to consumers’ Wi-Fi Internet connections to provide voice control to connected
`mobile devices through Bluetooth technology. The Echo is also equipped with Alexa. Certain
`Echo devices are equipped with Sidewalk.
`25.
`Amazon Ring devices are smart security products, including a video doorbell
`that allows Ring users to see, speak to, and record people at their doorsteps or other home
`areas. Certain Ring devices are equipped with Sidewalk.
`
`5 Form 10-K, Amazon.com, Inc., https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-
`0001018724/4d39f579-19d8-4119-b087-ee618abf82d6.pdf.
`6 Hall, supra, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Amazoncom.
`7 Matt Ward, Amazon: The Company Consuming Consumers, https://mattward.io/amazon-the-
`company-consuming-consumers/ (last accessed June 16, 2021).
`8 Paul R. La Monica, Amazon Is Now the Most Valuable Company on the Planet, CNN, (Jan, 8,
`2019, 11:27 A.M.), https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/08/investing/amazon-most-valuable-
`company-microsoft-google-apple/index.html.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 4
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 6 of 17
`
`
`
`26.
`Amazon states, “Amazon Sidewalk is a shared network that helps devices work
`better” and claims that Sidewalk operates “at no charge to customers.”9
`27.
`Amazon further states, “Sidewalk works by sharing a little bit of your internet
`bandwidth with your neighbors. By combining it with bandwidth donated by others in the
`neighborhood, Sidewalk creates a low-bandwidth, low-power network that can be used by
`neighbors to help one another in new ways.”10
`28.
`However, the sharing of bandwidth between neighbors is not donated. Rather, it
`is automatically taken from Amazon device-owners who own Amazon Sidewalk Devices as
`opposed to being volunteered for access and sharing.
`29.
`Amazon lists the following Echo and Ring devices as Amazon Sidewalk
`Devices:11
`
`a)
`b)
`c)
`d)
`e)
`f)
`g)
`h)
`i)
`j)
`k)
`l)
`
`Ring Floodlight Cam (2019)
`Ring Spotlight Cam Wired (2019)
`Ring Spotlight Cam Mount (2019)
`Echo (3rd Gen and newer)
`Echo Dot (3rd Gen and newer) for Kids
`Echo Dot with Clock (3rd Gen and newer)
`Echo Plus (All generations)
`Echo Show (2nd Gen and newer)
`Echo Spot
`Echo Studio
`Echo Input
`Echo Flex
`
`
`9 https://support.ring.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032492292-Amazon-Sidewalk-Information (last
`accessed June 16, 2021).
`10 Id.
`11 Id.
`
`COMPLAINT - 5
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 7 of 17
`
`
`
`30.
`Amazon currently uses up to 500 megabytes of Internet bandwidth through each
`Sidewalk Device, and this Internet traffic counts toward Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’
`maximum data usage from Internet service providers, creating the potential for overage charges
`to consumers for Amazon’s use of their Internet bandwidth. The maximum amount of
`bandwidth to be used through Sidewalk Devices, however, is potentially subject to increase
`over time.
`31.
`Owners and users of the Sidewalk Devices can only stop the unfair use of their
`Internet bandwidth if they are aware of the taking of the bandwidth via Sidewalk, find
`instructions for disabling Sidewalk, and take several steps to disable Sidewalk on their
`devices.12 Owners and users of Sidewalk Devices who do not opt out and have Sidewalk
`enabled are not compensated by Amazon for the use of their bandwidth.
`32.
`Additionally, Amazon does not clearly disclose that even if a customer initially
`opts out of the Sidewalk network, if they obtain a new Sidewalk-enabled device, Sidewalk will
`automatically be re-enabled, and they will need to opt-out again.
`33.
`The cost to Amazon to implement an independent Sidewalk network that did not
`utilize customer-owned devices would be enormous and may not even be possible.
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`34.
`This action is brought, and may properly proceed, as a class action pursuant to
`Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`35.
`Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of a Nationwide Class, defined as follows:
`All persons in the United States who bought or acquired and use an
`Amazon Sidewalk Device.
`36.
`Excluded from the Class are Amazon, its affiliates, employees, officers, and
`directors; persons or entities that purchased Echo or Ring devices for resale; and the Judge(s)
`assigned to this case. Plaintiffs reserve the right to modify, change, or expand the class
`
`12 Fowler, supra, note 1.
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT - 6
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 8 of 17
`
`
`definition if discovery and/or further investigation reveal that they should be expanded or
`otherwise modified.
`Numerosity: The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is
`37.
`impracticable. While the exact number and identities of individual members of the Class is
`unknown at this time, such information being in the sole possession of Amazon and obtainable
`by Plaintiffs only through the discovery process, Plaintiffs believe, and on that basis allege, that
`at least tens of millions of Sidewalk Devices have been sold nationwide, with more than 100
`million Echo devices sold.13
`Predominance: Common questions of law and fact exist as to all members of
`38.
`the Class. These common questions predominate over the questions affecting individual Class
`Members, and they include, but are not limited to, the following:
`a) Whether Amazon engaged in the conduct alleged herein;
`b) Whether Amazon automatically activated Sidewalk on Sidewalk Devices
`without explicit consumer consent;
`c) Whether Amazon sought permission from consumers to activate Sidewalk
`on their Sidewalk Devices;
`d) Whether Amazon provided adequate notice to consumers to activate
`Sidewalk on their Sidewalk Devices.
`e) Whether the Sidewalk Devices access and uses consumers’ personal Internet
`bandwidth;
`f) Whether Amazon is compensating consumers for the use of their personal
`Internet bandwidth;
`
`
`13 Avery Harmans, Amazon Has Finally Revealed How Many Alexa Devices Have Been Sold,
`BUSINESS INSIDER, (Jan. 14, 2019, 3:42 PM), https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-
`reveals-alexa-sales-2019-1; see also Abrar Al-Heeti, Amazon has sold more than 100 million
`Alexa Devices: Holiday sales of the Echo Dot also exceeded Amazon’s expectations, (Jan 4.
`2019, 3:51 PM), https://www.cnet.com/home/smart-home/amazon-has-sold-more-than-100-
`million-alexa-devices/.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 7
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 9 of 17
`
`
`
`g) Whether Amazon received permission from Internet service providers to
`access and use personal Internet bandwidth;
`h) Whether Amazon’s Sidewalk exposes consumers’ personal data to a
`heightened security risk;
`i) Whether Amazon’s conduct alleged herein violates consumer protection
`statutes and other laws as asserted herein;
`j) Whether Amazon engaged in unfair or deceptive business practices as
`asserted herein;
`k) Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members suffered an ascertainable loss as a
`result of Amazon’s use of their personal Internet bandwidth;
`l) Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members are entitled to damages as a result of
`Amazon’s conduct alleged herein, and if so, the amount or proper measure
`of those damages; and
`m) Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members are entitled to equitable relief,
`including but not limited to injunctive relief, including public injunctive
`relief as provided for pursuant to Washington law.
`Typicality: Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the Class, as Plaintiffs
`39.
`purchased or acquired a Sidewalk Device for which Amazon automatically engaged its
`Sidewalk technology, as did each member of the Class. Plaintiffs and Class Members were
`injured in the same manner by Amazon’s uniform course of conduct alleged herein. Plaintiffs
`and Class Members have the same claims against Amazon relating to the conduct alleged
`herein, and the same events giving rise to Plaintiffs’ claims for relief give rise to the claims of
`all Class Members. Plaintiffs and Class Members sustained monetary and economic injuries,
`including, but not limited to, ascertainable losses arising out of Amazon’s wrongful conduct in
`taking Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ personal Internet bandwidth for its own use without
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 8
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 10 of 17
`
`
`compensation and without prior consent. Plaintiffs are advancing the same claims and legal
`theories on behalf of themselves and all absent Class Members.
`Adequacy: Plaintiffs are adequate representatives of the Class because their
`40.
`interests do not conflict with the interests of the Class they seek to represent. Plaintiffs have
`retained counsel competent and highly experienced in complex class action litigation—
`including consumer protection class action cases—and they intend to prosecute this action
`vigorously. Plaintiffs and their counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the
`Class.
`
`Superiority: A class action is superior to all other available means of fair and
`41.
`efficient adjudication of Plaintiffs and Class members’ claims. The injury that each individual
`Class member has suffered is relatively small compared to the burden and expense of
`individual prosecution of the complex and extensive litigation that Amazon’s conduct
`necessitates. It would be virtually impossible for members of the Class to redress, individually
`and effectively, the wrongs Amazon has done to them. Even if Class members could afford
`such individual litigation, the court system could not. Individualized litigation presents a
`potential for inconsistent or contradictory judgments. Individualized litigation increases the
`delay and expense to all parties, and to the court system, given the complex legal and factual
`issues of the case. By contrast, a class action presents far fewer management difficulties and
`provides the benefits of single adjudication, an economy of scale, and comprehensive
`supervision by a single court. Upon information and belief, Class Members can be readily
`ascertained and notified.
`42.
`Amazon has acted, and refuses to act, on grounds generally applicable to the
`Class, thereby making final equitable and injunctive relief appropriate with respect to the Class
`as a whole.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 9
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 11 of 17
`
`
`
`WASHINGTON LAW APPLIES TO THE ENTIRE CLASS
`43. Washington’s substantive laws apply to every member of the Class, regardless
`of where in the United States the putative Class Member resides.
`44.
`Amazon’s Conditions of Use state, “By using any Amazon Service, you agree
`that applicable federal law, and the laws of the state of Washington, without regard to
`principles of conflict of laws, will govern these Conditions of Use and any dispute of any sort
`that might arise between you and Amazon.”14 These Conditions further state that “[a]ny dispute
`or claim relating in any way to your use of any Amazon Service will be adjudicated in the state
`or Federal courts in King County, Washington, and you consent to exclusive jurisdiction and
`venue in these courts.”15
`45.
`By choosing Washington law for the resolution of disputes, Defendants concede
`that it is appropriate for the Court to apply Washington law to this action.
`CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
`COUNT I
`Violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, RCW §§ 19.86.101, et seq.
`(On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)
`46.
`Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs
`of this complaint as though fully set forth herein.
`47.
`Defendants are “persons” within the meaning of the Washington Consumer
`Protection Act (“WCPA”), RCW 19.86.010(1), and they conduct “trade” and “commerce”
`within the meaning of RCW 19.86.010(2). Plaintiffs and other members of the Class are
`“persons” within the meaning of RCW 19.86.010(1).
`
`
`14 Conditions of Use, AMAZON.COM SERVICES,
`https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=508088 (last visited June 16,
`2021).
`15 Id.
`
`COMPLAINT - 10
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 12 of 17
`
`
`
`48.
`The WCPA protects both consumers and competitors by promoting fair
`competition in commercial markets for goods and services.
`49.
`To achieve that goal, the WCPA prohibits any person from using “unfair
`methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or
`commerce . . . .” RCW § 19.86.020.
`50.
`Plaintiffs and Class Members are current owners and users of Sidewalk Devices.
`51.
`Defendants falsely claim that consumers are donating their Internet bandwidth
`for the Sidewalk network. In fact, Defendants enabled the Sidewalk Devices to share
`consumers’ Internet bandwidth without prior consent, without adequate notice, and without
`compensation.
`52.
`Defendants’ conduct is deceptive. Amazon affirmatively misrepresents that its
`consumers are voluntarily sharing and donating their Internet bandwidth, constituting deceptive
`acts and practices. Amazon also states that it offers Sidewalk at “no charge to customers” but
`fails to disclose that while it may not charge its customers, Internet service providers charge
`fees when their customers exceed their bandwidth. Amazon fails to disclose that its use of
`customer bandwidth may result in such overcharge fees.
`53.
`Defendants’ conduct is unfair. Defendants’ failure to obtain consent to share
`Internet bandwidth, failure to provide adequate notice of sharing Internet bandwidth, and/or
`failure to compensate consumers for that bandwidth constitute unfair acts that offend public
`policy.
`54.
`Defendants’ deceptive and unfair acts and practices occurred in its trade or
`business and have proximately caused injury to Plaintiffs and Class Members. Defendants’
`general course of conduct is injurious to the public interest. Defendants’ acts are ongoing,
`meaning that the harmful effects of Defendants’ acts and/or omissions are repeated,
`widespread, and expected to last for years into the future.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 11
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 13 of 17
`
`
`
`55.
`By their acts and/or omissions as alleged herein, Defendants are forcing
`Plaintiffs to institute this action.
`56.
`As a direct, proximate, and legal result of Defendants’ deceptive and unfair acts
`and practices, Plaintiffs and Class Members have been, and continue to be, damaged in an
`amount in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this Court, including but not limited to the value
`of their personal Internet bandwidth, time spent learning about the Sidewalk network, time
`spent disabling the Sidewalk function on Sidewalk Devices, costs of Internet data use overages
`charged by Internet service providers, and other fees, expenses, and costs to be proven at trial.
`57.
`Plaintiffs have also sustained other economic losses as a direct, proximate, and
`legal result of Defendants’ conduct, in an amount to be proven at trial.
`58.
`Accordingly, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and Class Members, seek to
`enjoin further violation of the WCPA and to recover actual and treble damages (where
`applicable), together with the costs of bringing this suit, including reasonable attorney fees.
`COUNT II
`Claim For Theft of Telecommunication Services Pursuant to RCW § 9A.56.268
`(On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)
`59.
`Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs
`of this complaint as though fully set forth herein.
`60.
`Plaintiffs and Class Members use Sidewalk Devices for household and other
`personal uses.
`61. When Plaintiffs and Class Members use their Sidewalk Devices, Defendants
`take and use a portion of Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ personal Internet bandwidth to create
`Amazon’s Sidewalk network.
`62.
`Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ Internet bandwidth constitutes
`“telecommunications services” within the meaning of RCW §§ 80.04.010, 9.26A.100, and
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 12
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 14 of 17
`
`
`9A.56.268. Specifically, “telecommunications” means “the transmission of information by
`wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means.”16
`63.
`Defendants did not obtain prior consent or permission from Plaintiffs and Class
`Members for Amazon’s taking and use of the personal Internet bandwidth.
`64.
`Based on information and belief, Defendants knowingly failed to enter into a
`prior agreement to pay for the telecommunication services taken and used for the Sidewalk
`network with the intent to avoid payment for those services in violation of RCW § 9A.56.262.
`65.
`As a direct, proximate, and legal result of Defendants’ theft of
`telecommunication services, Plaintiffs and Class Members have been, and continue to be,
`damaged in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this Court, including but not
`limited to the value of their personal Internet bandwidth, time spent learning about the
`Sidewalk network, time spent disabling the Sidewalk function on Sidewalk Devices, costs of
`Internet data use overages charged by Internet service providers, and other fees, expenses, and
`costs to be proven at trial.
`66.
`Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of the Class Members, seek the following:
`(1) an injunction requiring that Defendants cease taking and using Plaintiffs’ and Class
`Members’ personal Internet bandwidth without prior consent, reasonable notice, and/or
`compensation; (2) actual damages; (3) costs of suit, including reasonable investigative and
`attorney fees and costs; and (4) civil penalties up to $25,000 for each violation of RCW
`§ 9A.56.262 as permitted by RCW § 9A.56.268.
`///
`///
`///
`///
`///
`
`
`16 RCW § 80.04.010; see also RCW §§ 9.26A.100, 9A.56.268
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 13
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 15 of 17
`
`
`
`COUNT III
`Unjust Enrichment
`(On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)
`67.
`Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs
`of this complaint as though fully set forth herein.
`68.
`Defendants receive a benefit from the use of customer Sidewalk Devices and
`internet bandwidth that is not contemplated in the sale contract between Amazon, on the one
`hand, and Plaintiffs and Class Members, on the other, for such devices.
`69.
`Specifically, for example, Defendants are able to market and provide additional
`features of its Sidewalk Devices products that can only be provided through Sidewalk or a
`similar network.
`70.
`By utilizing customer bandwidth instead of implementing an independent
`network, Defendants have also avoided substantial costs associated with building and
`maintaining an alternative, independent network that would be required to provide the same
`functionality. Likewise, they have stolen and repurposed valuable bandwidth from consumers.
`71.
`Defendants have acknowledged the value of the consumer bandwidth rerouted
`and redistributed through its Sidewalk Devices, and the value of the use of the devices for this
`purpose cannot be disputed.
`72.
`Under these circumstances, it would be inequitable to allow Defendants to retain
`the benefit of the use of consumer devices and bandwidth without payment for their value to
`Plaintiffs and Class members.
`
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class Members, respectfully request the
`following and pray for judgment as follows:
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 14
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 16 of 17
`
`1.
`
`2.
`3.
`4.
`5.
`6.
`7.
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`11.
`
`Certification of this case as a class action on behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class as
`defined above, appointment of Plaintiffs as representatives of the Class, and
`appointment of the undersigned attorneys as Lead Class Counsel;
`For appropriate declaratory relief;
`For appropriate injunctive relief;
`For general compensatory damages, according to proof;
`For special and consequential damages;
`For civil penalties, according to law;
`For prejudgment and post-judgment interest, as allowed by law;
`For attorney fees, witness fees, and costs of litigation Plaintiffs incur, according
`to proof;
`For punitive and exemplary damages, where applicable, according to proof to be
`determined at trial;
`For costs of suit herein; and
`For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper and just.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial for all issues so triable.
`
`DATED this 8th day of July, 2021.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`By: s/ Jason T. Dennett
`By: s/ Rebecca L. Solomon
`Jason T. Dennett, WSBA #30686
`jdennett@tousley.com
`Rebecca L. Solomon, WSBA# 51520
`rsolomon@tousley.com
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`Telephone: 206.682.5600/Fax: 206.682.2992
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`
`COMPLAINT - 15
`
`TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
`1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2200
`Seattle, Washington 98101
`TEL. 206.682.5600  FAX 206.682.2992
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-00912 Document 1 Filed 07/08/21 Page 17 of 17
`
`THE BRAD SOHN LAW FIRM, PLLC
`
`By: s/ Brad R. Sohn
`
`Brad R. Sohn (Application Forthcoming for Admission Pro
`Hac Vice)
`brad@bradsohnlaw.com
`1600 Ponce De Leon Blvd., Suite 1205
`Coral Gables, Florida 33134
`Telephone: (786) 708-9750/Fax: (305) 397-0650
`
`LIPPSMITH LLP
`By: s/ Graham B. LippSmith
`
`By: s/ MaryBeth LippSmith
`
`By: s/ Jaclyn L. Anderson
`
`Graham B. LippSmith (Application Forthcoming for
`Admission Pro Hac Vice)
`g@lippsmith.com
`MaryBeth LippSmith (Application Forthcoming for Admiss