Netflix Sued by Texas Attorney General

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against Netflix accusing the company of illegally tracking users (including children), designing its service to be “addictive,” and misleading consumers about data collection and advertising practices.

What the lawsuit alleges

• Netflix is “spying” on Texans by collecting extensive behavioral data on viewers — including minors — without proper awareness or consent, in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

• The complaint says Netflix operates a large-scale “surveillance apparatus,” logging petabytes of user-behavior data (such as play/pause, clicks, search and text input, and viewing duration) and processing millions of events per second.

• Texas claims Netflix long marketed itself as an ad‑free alternative that did not track or sell user data, but later rolled out an ad‑supported tier while allegedly sharing data with advertisers, ad‑tech firms, and data brokers like Experian and Acxiom.

• The suit also targets product design, arguing Netflix uses “dark patterns” and autoplay to keep users, including children, “glued to the screen” to maximize data collection and ad value.

Legal basis and requested remedies

• Paxton brings the case under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, alleging deceptive representations and unfair practices around privacy, data collection, and platform design.

• Texas is asking the court to:

  • Order Netflix to stop alleged illegal data collection and sharing.

  • Require deletion of data obtained unlawfully.

  • Prohibit the use of user data for targeted advertising without affirmative consent.

  • Turn off autoplay by default on children’s profiles.

  • Impose civil penalties of up to about $10,000 per violation.

Context and what’s next

• The complaint was filed May 11, 2026, in state court in Collin County, Texas (near Dallas).

• Netflix has not yet issued a detailed public response; reports indicate the company did not immediately comment when asked.

• The filing aligns this case with a broader wave of litigation and regulatory scrutiny over how big tech and media platforms track users, monetize behavioral data, target ads, and design allegedly addictive interfaces, especially where children are involved.