Are You Manipulated?

During online purchases have you ever felt pushed to buy more items than you intended or ended up paying more than you intended? If you have ever been nudged into a subscription that started as a free trial but does not seem to go away on its own after the trial period, chances are that you have been a victim of dark patterns. One of the most familiar feelings during online e-commerce these days is of haplessness. What are dark patterns? How do we identify them? Instances like these are not simple instances of ill-luck or lack of self-control but they are result of deceptive practices or dark patterns being at play.

It is alarming though not surprising that a study conducted by Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) Academic and Parallel HQ had revealed that 52 out of 53 popular apps use at least one deceptive practice¹. In most cases, consumers fall victim to recurring manipulative tropes on e-commerce platform and even when realisation to have been manipulated or tricked into overspending their hard-earned money dawns, they do not know what to do, where to go and whom to complain.

Unmasking deception: The urgent need to regulate dark patterns in India

In the fast-evolving digital economy powerful tools are being used to manipulate user experience (UX) and consumer behaviour by using deceptive user interface (UI), one such manipulation technique is “dark patterns”. Simply put “dark patterns” are “tricks used in websites and apps that makes you do things that you did not mean to, like buying or signing up for something”². These behaviours not only actively mislead but also coerce customers/users into taking actions which they did not intend. This action has emerged as a new threat to the autonomy of the customers and to the fair competition in the market. Given the circumstances, it has become essential as well as urgent to regulate such practices of the online commerce and digital service providers, since both are rapidly expanding.

Understanding dark patterns

Dark patterns are designed to benefit the businesses by tricking and manipulating the consumer/user behaviour, for them to end up doing things like offering private information, clicking to subscribe, pay higher prices, purchase things, etc. which they otherwise would not have done. Therefore, such practices are deceptive, unfair and not fair means of business. These are mainly targeted towards the section of society that is not tech-savvy or is vulnerable due to its age bracket.

In India, very first instance of an attempt at identifying and enforcing a self-discipline to prevent use of dark patterns had come only in June 2023 in the field of advertisements, through Guidelines for Online Deceptive Design Patterns in Advertising, 2023³ being issued by the ASCI. These ASCI guidelines identified and prohibited use of 4 kinds of dark patterns in advertisements. However, as the ASCI is a self-regulatory body, it has no teeth to enforce its guidelines.

Alarmed by the widescale deception tactics being adopted on digital platforms, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) which is the “Central Authority” established under Section 10⁴ of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA)⁵, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 18⁶ of the CPA in November 2023 came out with “the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023”⁷ (the Guidelines).

The Guidelines have laid out the definition of “dark patterns” and has recognised 13 dark patterns⁸; the list of the identified 13 patterns is not exhaustive but inclusive. Some out of the 13 patterns are examples of the what we as consumers face each day e.g., false urgency, which is when it is falsely stated or implied sense of urgency or scarcity to mislead a user into making an immediate purchase or into taking an immediate action; basket sneaking, which means that the product would be added to cart of the consumer without them knowing; subscription trap, wherein it would become next to impossible for the consumer to unsubscribe; nagging wherein there the apps bombard the consumer with unnecessary notifications; drip pricing, where elements of prices are not revealed upfront or an amount higher than shown earlier is charged finally.

Even though the term “dark pattern” was first coined in the year 2010⁹, the Guidelines were only issued by the Central Authority in the year 2023. These are separate from the already existing Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020¹⁰, under which a consumer complaint can be filed in terms of Rule 8 but those Rules did not cover the malaise of dark patterns and similar such practices.

Thereafter, on the National Consumer Day, 24-12-2024¹¹ the Government of India (GOI) in order to bring awareness and enforce guidelines launched three digital tools to combat dark patters, namely, the Jago Grahak Jago App, the e-Justice and Grievance Redressal through Information Technology and Innovation (e-Jagriti) App, and the Jagriti Dashboard. The Jagriti App is developed to digitalise and streamline the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission across India. This app helps the consumer not only to file complaints but also helps them access crucial information about their rights and track case status¹². Jago Grahak Jago App facilitates consumers to access various services on a single platform¹³ and helps consumer identify dark patterns¹⁴. Jagriti Dashboard, digitises and streamlines the consumer dispute resolutions. It aims to provide a transparent, efficient and accessible platform for consumers¹⁵.

It is important to note that since there was a gap in the existing framework of the CPA, Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA)¹⁶ and Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)¹⁷ therefore, CCPA issued the guidelines and recognised dark patterns as unfair practice and violation of consumer rights thereby including them within the ambit of the CPA as described above. Therefore, it is evident that considering the gravity of the situation, efforts have been made by GOI to protect the consumer’s interest and prevent their exploitation in the online markets. However, the question is whether those efforts have been successful and if these alone are sufficient?

It is pertinent to understand, if there is an avenue for grievance redressal available to victims of dark patterns and similar such practices and if a complaint can be filed using the Guidelines issued by CCPA? If so, what provisions of the CPA would apply. Since the Guidelines are issued by the Central Authority under Section 18 of the CPA and further, the definition given therein recognises dark patterns as unfair practices¹⁸ and violation of consumer rights, therefore, the provisions of CPA would apply with full force and grievance redressal mechanism is also available within the framework of CPA. In case there are any contravention of directives issued by the CCPA as the Central Authority or of its Guidelines, or if a consumer feels victimised by any of the unfair and deceptive practices, a complaint can either be filed with the Central Authority under Section 19¹⁹, which shall then investigate the matter and act on it under Sections 20²⁰ and 21²¹ of the CPA; or a consumer complaint can be filed under Section 35²² of the CPA and the complaint would then proceed as per the relevant provisions of the CPA and the Rules prescribed thereunder. On such a complaint being filed, if the Central Authority is satisfied it can cause investigation regarding violation of consumer rights, thereafter it can decide to impose penalty upon errant entities, which may extend to rupees ten lakhs. For repeat violations, the penalty for each subsequent contravention may extend up to rupees fifty lakhs. In case of failure to comply with any directions of the Central Authority issued under Sections 20 and 21, there is also a provision of punishment with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and/or for imposition of fine which may extend to Rupees twenty lakhs, in terms of Section 88²³ of the CPA.

The CCPA pursuant to issuance of its guidelines has taken significant steps to alleviate the condition of the market and safeguarding the consumer interest. CCPA²⁴ issued notice dated 19-6-2024 to Indigo Airlines for two significant dark patterns, one was ”confirm shaming” for certain add-on facilities on payment basis, where option for such facility was given manipulatively, shaming the consumer to read as “no, I will take risk”, which after the notice was changed to a neutral phraseology “no, I will not add to the trip”; and second was the opaque seat selection process, whereby airline obscured the consumer ability to skip paid seat selection and nudged them towards it, which after the notice was changed to a neutral process, clearly indicating “you can skip preferred seat selection and complete your booking. Indigo will auto-assign a seat prior to your travel”. Thereafter, CCPA issued a notice to BookMyShow on 11-2-2025, for a practice by which Re 1 was auto deducted for charity, which subsequent to the notice was changed by modifying its UI and giving consumers a clear option to select, if they would like to pay.

Further, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, GOI in its Press Release dated 22-7-2025²⁵ has informed that they convened a joint meeting on 28-5-2025 with representatives from major e-commerce companies, industry associations, Voluntary Consumer Organisations and National Law Universities for a focused dialogue on eliminating deceptive online practices. As an outcome of the said meeting, an “Advisory in terms of CPA on self-audit by e-commerce platforms for detecting the dark patterns on their platforms to create a fair, ethical and consumer centric digital ecosystem”, was issued by CCPA on 5-6-2025. Three months’ time was given for a self-audit and a consequent declaration of being free of dark patterns is required to be issued, with a view to ensure fair digital ecosystem. The outcome and enforceability of which is still to be seen in due course of time.

The stakes: Autonomy, privacy, and competition

It is essential to regulate dark patterns to protect the fundamental principles in the age of digital consumerism²⁶ such as transparency, autonomy, and choice. These tactics if left unchecked would undermine market fairness and even competition from those who principally do not adopt such practices. Additionally, such practices distort the consent mechanism and violate the privacy laws as well, which results in giving competitive edge to unscrupulous entities. Study undertaken by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC)²⁷, reveals that if customers are exposed to multiple dark patterns, they are likely to do more impulse buys, frivolous spending or disclose personal data.

The global regulatory landscape

Jurisdictions like the United States, European Union, and Australia have begun to integrate dark pattern regulation into their broader consumer protection and data privacy laws.

(a) In the United States, the consumer protection and regulation of dark patterns along with penalising the service providers for the “unfair and deceptive practice” is governed by Federal Trade Commission Act, 1914 (FTCA)²⁸.

In Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Capital Management²⁹, Affiliated Managers Group (AMG) was found to have used dark patterns to auto renew the subscription instead of closing payday loans to borrowers. As a result, the users were being directed to more expensive subscription models instead of cancelling it. FTC found AMG capital management guilty of unfair and deceptive practices under Section 5 of the FTCA. The FTC ruling and the amount of penalty that was levied on AMG were upheld by the Court of Appeals.

(b) There are numerous laws in EU that are applied to the rising concern of the dark patterns, misleading practices, and associated tactics³⁰. Legislations such as Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, 2005 (UCPD)³¹, Directive on Consumer Rights, 2011³², General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)³³, Omnibus Directive, 2019³⁴, Digital Markets Act, 2022 (DMA)³⁵, Digital Services Act, 2022 (DSA)³⁶, Data Act, 2023³⁷ and Artificial Intelligence Act, 2024.³⁸ EU does not use one unified, codified legal definition of dark patterns. The common features in the definitions are the use of expression “the manipulative” or “deceptive nature of the practice”, and “resulting negative or harmful outcome”.

(c) In Australia, current consumer protection laws are failing to address the rising problem and therefore regulatory reform proposals seek to expand the definition of unfair trade practices to cover other patterns³⁹.

Each jurisdiction recognises that the manipulation of consumer behaviour through design, irrespective of intent must be penalised when it impairs choice or privacy of the customers.

The lag

In order to enforce the guidelines, the Government as pointed out above had launched three app i.e. Jagriti App, Jago Grahak Jago and Jagriti Dashboard. The idea behind launching these apps was to promote awareness and to make the consumer redressals mechanism digital and efficient. However, these apps will only be able to help if the customer is digitally literate and technologically savvy. Further, downloading three apps for different things related to the same subject is not only a cumbersome and inefficient mechanism but also impractical. Further, filing the consumer complaint on the app and tracking its progress alone does not really help much, unless the virtual hearing of such complaint before the consumer forum is also made available through the app itself amongst other integrated facilities being made available on the same app. Therefore, even though the intent behind launching apps may be laudable but its translation into effective mechanism to provide succour to victims of unfair practices is very limited and therefore, it needs a rethink.

Further, it is also seen that despite the definition and illustrations of dark patterns being laid out, grievance mechanism being made available, it has still not translated into a robust and effective system which is providing relief where needed. The awareness in consumers and active recourse to availing of such remedies is either missing or is very limited. Therefore, there is a need to introspect and to make the framework and mechanism more efficient and effective.

What can India do next

To address the growing menace of dark patterns, India must:

(1) Strengthen legal infrastructure

India should create a more robust, detailed, consumer friendly framework within the CPA. The Guidelines must be integrated, powers of direction for investigation, penalties and punishments which are available to the Central Authority must be extended for consumer complaints to the State Commissions and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as well. The powers of Central Authority should be extended and utilised for compulsory audits of UI/UX, systemic overhauling and market regulation and not for individual consumer complaints and grievance redressals. Extensive awareness campaigns must be initiated to make consumers vigilant against such practices and their rights. The existing framework must be made comprehensive and regulators must regularly update the list of banned dark patterns, set meaningful penalties, and lay out concrete steps for enforcement.

(2) Central Enforcement Agency

The CCPA should take the lead on policymaking, investigations, and complaints about systemic practices of dark patterns, and such similar practices with a view to provide larger relief to consumers at large rather than individual reliefs. Further, coordination with sector regulators like the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and the Data Protection Board of India is key to ensure digital consumers are protected across the Board. For the said purpose CCPA should be empowered as a Central Agency for effective implementation of policy, law and regulations relating to consumer welfare in digital and e-commerce, which would also facilitate better coordination and enforcement.

(3) Mandate design and algorithmic ethics by law

All digital platforms should be legally required to follow transparency, “privacy by design” and consumer interest first principles. Regular/random UI/UX audits through Central Agency as proposed above should be compulsory, to expose and eliminate deceptive designs, especially for companies that handle large volumes of personal data.

(4) Facilitate Consumer Redressal

Establish a single transparent, user-friendly reporting portal where consumers can log, understand and complain about their dark pattern experiences. Publicly accessible complaint and enforcement actions data will enhance regulatory credibility.

(5) Promote awareness and ethical design

Various sector regulators like RBI, IRDAI, TRAI along with the CCPA as the coordination/Central Agency working should team up for large-scale public campaigns to raise awareness, spot and avoid dark patterns in order to help consumers. Companies and the digital platform that embraces ethical design should be publicly recognised, encouraging others to follow best practices and prioritise user trust.

Conclusion

There is no doubt that dark patterns pose threat to India’s digital economy and consumers are being victimised at large scale. This not only erodes trust, compromises privacy, distorts consumer choices, but also impedes fair competition. India’s existing regulations, while well-intentioned, are proving inadequate to address the scale of this challenge. Therefore, a cohesive, transparent, and enforceable legal framework that is backed by proactive institutional support which is otherwise also sine qua non, is the need of the hour; only then can we ensure that the digital marketplace remains a place of informed choice, not a place for silent coercion or manipulative victimisation.