'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Twitch, with the plaintiff alleging that the platform's Terms of Service (ToS) prohibit users and streamers from criticizing the company. On June 2, 2025, nine pages of a legal document surfaced on X, showing that "Daniel Blitch," the plaintiff, had filed a class action complaint against Twitch Interactive, Inc., demanding a jury trial.
According to the "Introduction" section of the document, the plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against the Amazon-owned livestreaming platform for violating the California "Yelp Law." The law prohibits businesses from including terms in their contracts or proposed contracts that waive or restrict consumers' rights to make statements about the business, its employees, agents, goods, or services.
The legal document elaborated on the plaintiff's issues with Twitch's ToS, stating:
"Twitch's Terms prohibit users from utilizing "TWITCH, the Twitch logos, and any other product or service name, logo, or slogan used by Twitch, and the look and feel of the Twitch Services, including all page headers, custom graphics, button icons, and scripts" in any manner that "disparages or discredits Twitch."
Trending
"Additionally, the Terms bar users from creating, uploading, transmitting, distributing, or sharing "any content that is inaccurate, unlawful, infringing, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, harassing, threatening, abusive, inflammatory, or otherwise objectionable" while using Twitch. Accordingly, Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, seek civil penalties, injunctive relief, and attorneys' fees and costs for Twitch's violations of Cal. Civ. Code § 1670.8."
Allegations against Twitch in the class action lawsuit explored
The legal document's fourth page contained the "factual allegations" against Twitch. According to the plaintiff, the platform's Terms of Service constitute an "unlawful waiver of users' rights," preventing users from expressing their "genuine views."
Pertinent excerpts from the court document read:
"Twitch's Terms of Service, which users must accept when making purchases, prohibits or discourages users from making statements that Twitch deems objectionable or potentially harmful to its brand, services, or affiliates. Specifically, Twitch's Terms includes language to the effect that users may not post content Twitch deems harmful, disparaging, misleading, or offensive. Such provisions are enforced through moderation, account penalties, and removal of content."
"Enforcement mechanisms include the unilateral "termination or suspension of your rights to use." Terms of Service § 10. See also, Terms of Sale § 6 "Twitch reserves the right to deactivate any user from any Twitch Services for any reason or no reason. Once a user has been deactivated, any Digital Content accumulated by that user will be forfeited and may not be reinstated."
"These provisions amount to an unlawful waiver of users' rights under California law to make statements about Twitch and its services.
"Twitch's enforcement of its Terms deters users from expressing their genuine views, thereby chilling consumer speech."
The plaintiff also described their experience from one or two years ago, when Twitch allegedly failed to pay its streamers properly, causing users to be cautious about what they said about the platform.
In addition, the plaintiff alleged that a streamer was "reprimanded" for criticizing the livestreaming platform:
"For instance, in Plaintiff's experience, about one to two years ago, there were discussions that Twitch was not paying its streamers properly, and Twitch users had to be careful about what was being said on the platform. People avoided even mentioning Twitch, and used words like “onionized” instead of “unionized.” Plaintiff believes that one streamer was even reprimanded for criticizing Twitch. Twitch's provisions in its Terms targeting speech and attempted enforcement thereof violate Cal. Civ. Code. § 1670.8 and entitle Plaintiff and the class members to civil penalties and injunctive relief."
Twitch has not yet issued a statement regarding the class action lawsuit.
