Streamlabs, a popular suite of tools used by creators to livestream and collect viewer donations on platforms like Twitch and YouTube, faced allegations that some donors were unknowingly enrolled in an automatically renewing subscription called Streamlabs Pro. The case focused on a common livestream workflow: a viewer adds a GIF or effect to a donation, then is allegedly steered into a $5.99/month plan with auto-renewal terms that plaintiffs say were not adequately disclosed. The proposed settlement fund is $4.4 million and covers U.S. users who were enrolled and billed during the period from March 3, 2018 to May 17, 2022, with payments generally calculated on a pro-rata basis tied to the number of monthly charges (minus any refunds already received). The lawsuit was filed because plaintiffs claimed Streamlabs’ enrollment and billing flow amounted to deceptive “negative option” marketing—where silence or inaction leads to ongoing charges—violating California consumer-protection and automatic-renewal requirements that emphasize clear, conspicuous disclosure and informed consent. Its significance goes beyond one company: subscription monetization is now embedded across gaming and creator tools, and regulators and courts have increasingly scrutinized “dark patterns” that blur the line between a one-time purchase (like a donation add-on) and a recurring plan. Similar disputes have targeted auto-renew practices across apps, streaming services, and online memberships, and the industry context is shaped by laws such as California’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL) and broader FTC “negative option” enforcement that push companies to present renewal terms transparently and make cancellation straightforward without hidden steps or surprise billing