CD Reiss v. Amazon.com—Why Indie Authors Are Taking the Tech Giant to Court
When indie‑romance writer CD Reiss filed an antitrust class action against Audible last year, most observers gave it long odds. On June 11, that narrative flipped when U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon refused to dismiss the case, clearing the way for discovery and, potentially, a jury trial.
What Happened
Audible—whose parent Amazon controls an estimated 60 % of U.S. audiobook sales—offers authors two royalty tracks:
- Exclusive: 40 % royalties if the author agrees not to distribute anywhere else for 90 days.
- Non‑exclusive: 25 % royalties with no lock‑up.
Reiss and a proposed class of indie writers argue that the disparity is not a benign discount but an exercise of monopoly power that forces creators to “overpay” for distribution. Judge Rochon found those allegations “plausible,” pointing to Audible’s dominant share and the fees differential.
Why It Matters for Business
- Platform conduct under a microscope: The decision adds to a line of cases (e.g., Epic v. Apple) testing how far dominant digital marketplaces can push exclusivity.
- Discovery risk: Amazon must now turn over internal data on pricing, marketing spend, and royalty economics—information rivals, regulators, and authors’ unions have long wanted.
- Possible fallout: A class win could mean back‑pay for thousands of authors and could prompt Audible to re‑write its distribution agreements or face structural remedies.
What’s Next
The case—transferred to the Western District of Washington (No. 2:24‑cv‑00851)—moves into fact discovery through late 2025, with class‑certification briefing likely in early 2026. Expect parallel pressure from the DOJ’s Antitrust Division, already investigating Big Tech’s creator terms.
Takeaway
If you rely on platform exclusivity as a revenue lever, this suit is a flashing yellow light: lock‑ups must be tied to demonstrable pro‑competitive benefits, not just market power.
