Anthropic Sued Over 'Deceptive' Max Plan Usage Limits — SkimNews
Get the Tech newsletter
Daily tech — startups, AI labs, chips, the launches that shape the next decade. Free.
- Anthropic faces an expanded class action filed by former FTC attorneys Monica Vaca and Kati Daffan, who allege the company's Max plan ($100 or $200 per month for advertised "5x" or "20x" Pro usage) is deceptively marketed because the multipliers apply only within five-hour session chunks subject to undisclosed weekly caps.
- Anthropic announced the Max plan in April 2025 but did not impose the allegedly deceptive weekly session limits until August, as the company pushed to compete with OpenAI, according to the complaint.
- Anthropic's motion to dismiss argued the session-limit disclosures are "the digital equivalent of flipping a product over to read the back label," accessible via hyperlinks during the purchase process — a characterization plaintiffs' counsel Vaca disputed, saying consumers cannot "audit" what they'll actually receive.
- Vaca said Max subscribers frequently upgrade on the fly when they hit Pro plan limits mid-project and are then surprised by the actual usage caps, adding that workers felt compelled to pay high subscription prices to avoid becoming irrelevant in the job market.
- Anthropic acknowledged cost concerns in its Fable 5.1 release notes, stating it was "addressing the feedback we've received from customers on price," signaling awareness of the squeeze the lawsuit describes.
- The complaint was originally filed in July, withdrawn, and refiled as an expanded class action — a rare legal attempt to penalize AI labs for what the article calls the "industry's growing money squeeze."
Why it matters: Anthropic's Max plan charges up to $200 per month on usage multipliers that plaintiffs say shrink dramatically once session windows and weekly caps are applied, meaning a category of professional subscribers paying premium prices may be receiving a fraction of the compute they were sold. The case, led by attorneys with 38 combined years at the FTC, applies traditional false-advertising precedent to a subscription product that critics describe as a "black box" — and Anthropic's own Fable 5.1 notes concede customers are pushing back on price.
Ask SkimNews
