Designed To Deceive: Strengthening Consumer Protection Against Dark Patterns In India

Author(s): Sakthi Varsha

Paper Details: Volume 4, Issue 4

Citation: IJLSSS 4(4) 15

Page No: 137 – 152

ABSTRACT

Digital technology has changed the way people shop and use services. Online platforms offer convenience, but many businesses use design techniques called dark patterns to influence consumers’ decisions. These include hidden charges, fake urgency, difficult subscription cancellations, misleading advertisements, and complicated cancellation procedures. Such practices reduce consumers’ ability to make informed and independent choices. To address these issues, India has strengthened its consumer protection framework through the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, and the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, issued by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA). This paper explains the concept of dark patterns and their different types, examines the legal and regulatory framework governing them, and discusses important judicial decisions and recent actions taken by the CCPA. It also identifies the existing challenges in regulating dark patterns and suggests measures to improve consumer protection. The paper concludes that greater transparency, fairness, and accountability are essential to build a safer and more reliable digital marketplace in India.

Keywords: Dark Patterns, Consumer Protection, E-Commerce, Consumer Protection Act 2019, CCPA, Digital Consumer Rights, Deceptive Design.

1. INTRODUCTION

Digital technology has reshaped how people buy goods and access services. Within minutes, a consumer can shop, book a ticket, order a meal, or sign up for an online service. This has made everyday transactions quicker and easier. To attract users, companies invest heavily in the design of their websites and apps. Much of this design genuinely improves the user’s experience, but some of it is deliberately engineered to nudge users toward choices they would not make if the relevant information were presented plainly. Such manipulative design is what is meant by “dark patterns” practices such as hidden charges, artificial urgency, misleading advertising, pre-ticked boxes, and cancellation procedures that are made unnecessarily complicated. Because these techniques generate confusion or pressure, they weaken a consumer’s capacity to choose freely and with full information. Recognising this problem, India has built a layered response consisting of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019[1], the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020[2], and the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, notified by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA).[3]

This paper sets out what is meant by dark patterns, reviews the Indian legal architecture that addresses them, discusses relevant judicial reasoning together with recent enforcement steps, and proposes ways of making consumer protection in the digital marketplace more robust.

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This study aims to:

• Explain the meaning of dark patterns and the different ways they are used on digital platforms.
• Examine the legal framework regulating dark patterns in India, focusing on the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, and the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023.
• Analyse important judicial decisions related to consumer protection, transparency, and informed consent.
• Study the role of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) in preventing and regulating deceptive online practices.
• Identify the challenges in controlling dark patterns and suggest measures to strengthen consumer protection in India’s digital marketplace.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This paper follows a doctrinal method, drawing on both primary and secondary material. The primary material consists of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, and the relevant case law. The secondary material draws on books, journal articles, government reports, working papers, and other published sources. The paper is analytical and descriptive in approach, working through the present legal architecture, pointing to gaps in regulation, and putting forward measures capable of strengthening consumer protection against dark patterns.

4. UNDERSTANDING DARK PATTERNS

Digital businesses compete by building interfaces that are appealing and simple to navigate. Sound design helps a consumer take in information and finish a transaction without friction. Difficulties arise, however, when design choices are made deliberately to confuse, pressure, or mislead the user  this is what has come to be called a dark pattern. User-experience designer Harry Brignull first used the phrase in 2010, applying it to website and app designs built on purpose to push people toward actions that do not really serve their own interests.[4]

Dark patterns are not the same thing as ordinary marketing. Advertising typically tries to inform and persuade; dark patterns instead narrow a consumer’s room to decide independently, leaning on psychological levers such as fear of missing out, manufactured urgency, confusion, and emotional pressure.

A travel site claiming “only one room is left” to rush a booking, or a retailer quietly adding extras to a cart without clear consent, are everyday illustrations of how such practices interfere with a consumer’s genuine choice. Under the Guidelines, the CCPA defines dark patterns as “deceptive interface or user-experience practices that mislead a consumer or otherwise curb their ability to decide freely and with full information,”[5] and the Guidelines list thirteen specific practices that are prohibited.[6] Several of the more significant forms are outlined below.

4.1 FALSE URGENCY

False urgency works by manufacturing time pressure: claims of dwindling stock or deals about to expire nudge a consumer toward a hasty purchase before the decision has been properly weighed. Messaging such as “only two items left” or a countdown clock counting down to an “offer end” are typical triggers of this kind.[7]

4.2 BASKET SNEAKING

Basket sneaking occurs when a platform adds items, services, donations, or fees to a consumer’s cart without clear consent additions that frequently surface only once the consumer reaches the checkout stage.[8]

4.3 CONFIRM SHAMING

Confirm shaming relies on guilt rather than offering a neutral choice. Instead of allowing a consumer to decline an offer in plain language, the platform frames the refusal option in terms designed to make the consumer feel foolish or careless for saying no.[9]

4.4 SUBSCRIPTION TRAP

A subscription trap arises where enrolment is made effortless while cancellation is made deliberately cumbersome, so that consumers keep paying for a service they no longer want simply because they cannot easily find the exit.[10]

4.5 INTERFACE INTERFERENCE

Interface interference refers to layout choices that push options favourable to the business into prominence while options favourable to the consumer are hidden or downplayed — a prominent “accept” button paired with a barely visible decline link is a typical illustration.[1]

4.6 DISGUISED ADVERTISEMENT

A disguised advertisement is built to look like ordinary content or an organic search result, so that a consumer believes they are seeing an independent recommendation when, in reality, it is paid promotion.[12] Because such tactics operate largely below a consumer’s awareness, curbing dark patterns generally is essential to protecting consumer autonomy and encouraging ethical design in the digital space.

5. EVOLUTION OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK REGULATING DARK PATTERNS IN INDIA

Expanding use of digital platforms has thrown up consumer-protection issues that did not exist before. When e-commerce was still new in India, there was no law that spoke to dark patterns directly, although general consumer-protection statutes offered some protection against misleading and unfair conduct. As online commerce grew, it became clear that a more focused regulatory response was needed.

India’s framework for dealing with deceptive digital conduct has taken shape in stages, principally through the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, and the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023.

5.1 CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is India’s principal consumer-rights statute. It replaced the earlier Consumer Protection Act, 1986, bringing in a series of reforms geared toward present-day concerns, digital transactions among them. One of its central features is Section 10, which establishes the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to safeguard consumer interests, look into violations of consumer rights, curb unfair trade practices, and take action against misleading advertising.[13]

The 2019 Act does not use the phrase “dark patterns” itself, but a good deal of such conduct falls within the definition of “unfair trade practices” in Section 2(47), which reaches deceptive methods used by businesses to mislead consumers or skew their purchasing decisions unfairly.[14]

Hidden charges, misleading claims, and deceptive subscription tactics can therefore be evaluated as unfair trade practices under this broader head, giving the Act a basic role in shielding consumers from manipulative digital conduct. The Act also strengthens available remedies by letting consumers bring grievances over defective goods, deficient services, and unfair trade practices before consumer commissions, giving them a formal route to contest harmful digital conduct.

5.2 CONSUMER PROTECTION (E-COMMERCE) RULES, 2020

The fast growth of online retail created demand for rules aimed specifically at e-commerce activity, and the Government responded with the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020.

These Rules impose several duties on e-commerce entities, among them the obligation to disclose clear information on products, prices, refund terms, payment options, and grievance-redressal channels.[15]

The broader aim is to promote transparency and discourage unfair conduct in online transactions by requiring platforms to give accurate information and avoid misleading buyers during the purchase process. Even though the Rules do not use the term “dark patterns,” their underlying goals track the prevention of deceptive design closely — hidden costs, unclear pricing, and misleading claims all cut against the transparency and fair-dealing principles built into the Rules. In this sense, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020 functioned as an indirect brake on certain manipulative practices even before a dedicated dark-patterns regime existed.

5.3 GUIDELINES FOR PREVENTION AND REGULATION OF DARK PATTERNS, 2023

India’s most decisive regulatory move on dark patterns came through the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, notified by the Central Consumer Protection Authority. Issued under Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and effective from 30 November 2023, the Guidelines represent India’s first regulatory instrument focused squarely on dark patterns.[16]

Clause 3 of the Guidelines carries the same definition set out above dark patterns as practices that “mislead a consumer or otherwise curb their ability to decide freely and with full information”  and Annexure I lists thirteen prohibited practices, including:[17]

• False urgency
• Basket sneaking
• Confirm shaming
• Subscription trap
• Drip pricing
• Disguised advertisement
• Interface interference
• Bait and switch
• Nagging
• Trick wording
• SaaS billing
• Rogue malware
• Scarcity claims

The Guidelines bind advertisers, sellers, manufacturers, service providers, and online platforms functioning in India, with the underlying goal of making digital businesses respect consumer choice and adopt transparent design. Their arrival marks a shift away from broad consumer-protection principles toward rules that target interface manipulation specifically.

6. JUDICIAL APPROACH TO DARK PATTERNS

No Indian court has yet decided a case squarely on dark patterns. Even so, a body of judicial reasoning on consumer protection, unfair contract terms, transparency, and informed consent already exists, and these principles are well placed to guide future disputes over deceptive digital conduct.

6.1 INDIAN JUDICIAL APPROACH

CENTRAL INLAND WATER TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD. V. BROJO NATH GANGULY[18]

In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court examined the validity of unfair contract terms imposed where bargaining power was unequal, holding that unreasonable and unfair terms can be struck down as opposed to public policy.

The Court recognised that a party in a weaker bargaining position should not be forced to accept terms dictated by the stronger party. This reasoning maps directly onto digital transactions, where consumers routinely accept standard terms fixed by online platforms with no genuine room to negotiate. Dark patterns often exploit exactly this imbalance, pressuring consumers into unwanted services, subscriptions, or conditions. The judgment therefore supplies a useful yardstick for assessing whether a digital platform is abusing its dominant position to impose unfair terms.

NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. V. M. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY[19]

Here, the Supreme Court emphasised the importance of protecting consumer interests and ensuring that remedies under consumer-protection law are genuinely effective. The Court held that consumer-protection legislation must be read so as to give consumers real protection. Although the dispute had nothing to do with digital platforms, the underlying principle carries over to online businesses that mislead their users: consumers are entitled to fair treatment, accurate information, and effective remedies whenever a business resorts to deceptive methods.

6.2 INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL APPROACH

Courts and regulators outside India have also shaped principles relevant to dark patterns and digital consumer rights.

PLANET49 GMBH V. VERBRAUCHERZENTRALE BUNDESVERBAND[20]

In this case, the Court of Justice of the European Union looked at whether pre-ticked consent boxes on websites were valid, holding that consent has to be freely given, specific, and informed  a checkbox that is pre-selected by default does not, by itself, amount to genuine consent. The ruling matters a great deal for dark patterns, since pre-selected options are a routine device used to steer what consumers choose, and it reinforces the requirement that consent be active and meaningful.

SPECHT V. NETSCAPE COMMUNICATIONS CORP.[21]

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit considered whether users could be held to terms that were concealed and never properly brought to their notice, holding that a user cannot be bound by conditions they were not given a fair chance to see before accepting. This reasoning applies directly to digital platforms where key information can be buried in complicated design or an unclear interface.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V. EPIC GAMES INC.[22]

The United States Federal Trade Commission pursued Epic Games over design choices that resulted in unwanted purchases by users. The matter showed that a company can face liability where its interface design manipulates consumers into transactions they never intended, confirming that dark patterns raise more than a design concern — they raise real legal accountability under consumer-protection law.

7. ENFORCEMENT BY THE CENTRAL CONSUMER PROTECTION AUTHORITY (CCPA)

The Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 mark a meaningful advance in shielding consumers from deceptive digital conduct, but rules on paper cannot curb unfair practices unless enforcement backs them up. That responsibility rests chiefly with the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), set up under Section 10 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

The CCPA has the power to protect consumer rights, look into complaints, hold inquiries, issue directions, impose penalties where warranted, and act against unfair trade practices and misleading advertising  powers that let it oversee how digital businesses behave and secure compliance with consumer-protection law.

7.1 ADVISORY TO E-COMMERCE PLATFORMS

After the Guidelines were notified, the CCPA called on e-commerce companies to examine their own websites and applications and to weed out deceptive interface design through internal self-audits.[23] These self-audits are meant to let consumers decide on the basis of clear information rather than being steered by manipulative design, with businesses expected to review their pricing, subscription models, advertising, consent mechanisms, and cancellation processes to bring them within the law.

7.2 ENFORCEMENT MEASURES

The CCPA has since acted against businesses whose practices were found likely to mislead consumers.[24] Complaints involving misleading advertisements, hidden charges, unauthorised cart additions, and deceptive subscription tactics have prompted the Authority to direct businesses to discontinue the offending conduct while insisting that platforms keep their online transactions fully transparent.[25] Although still a young enforcement regime, this record signals that deceptive interface design is now being treated as a genuine consumer-protection concern rather than simply a business or marketing choice.[26]

7.3 IMPORTANCE OF CCPA ENFORCEMENT

The CCPA’s role goes beyond handing out penalties its enforcement work pushes businesses toward ethical digital practices and builds greater transparency into online transactions.

Robust enforcement benefits consumers in several ways:

• It discourages businesses from turning to deceptive interface design.
• It builds public confidence in digital commerce.
• It promotes fair competition among businesses.
• It encourages responsible innovation without sacrificing consumer rights.

How well the Dark Patterns Guidelines succeed will depend heavily on sustained monitoring, prompt investigation of complaints, and cooperation between regulators and digital businesses.

8. CHALLENGES IN REGULATING DARK PATTERNS

Even though India now has a legal framework aimed at dark patterns, several practical obstacles continue to affect how well it works.

8.1 RAPID TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT

Technology moves quickly. Digital platforms constantly update their sites, apps, and interfaces, while artificial intelligence, machine learning, and personalised recommendation systems keep generating fresh ways of influencing consumer behaviour. As technology advances, new forms of dark patterns are likely to appear outside the scope of existing rules, requiring regulators to keep updating their understanding of digital practice.

8.2 DIFFICULTY IN IDENTIFYING DARK PATTERNS

Not every persuasive design amounts to deception. Businesses have legitimate reasons to build attractive interfaces that improve the customer experience and drive sales, and the real difficulty lies in telling ordinary marketing techniques apart from manipulative design. Because that line is often blurred, regulators can struggle to decide whether a particular design crosses into a breach of consumer-protection law, which makes clear standards and consistent interpretation essential.

8.3 LACK OF CONSUMER AWARENESS

Many consumers remain unaware of how digital interfaces shape their decisions.[27] Hidden charges, pre-selected options, recurring subscriptions, and misleading advertisements often go unnoticed simply because consumers do not recognise them as dark patterns. Without that awareness, affected consumers rarely complain, allowing unfair practices to persist. Building consumer awareness therefore remains one of the central challenges of effective regulation.

8.4 MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT

India has thousands of online businesses running websites and apps, which makes comprehensive monitoring a demanding task. The CCPA needs technical know-how, digital monitoring tools, and sufficient personnel to catch violations efficiently, and effective enforcement further depends on investigating complaints promptly and acting on them without delay.

8.5 CROSS-BORDER DIGITAL PLATFORMS

A significant share of the platforms serving Indian consumers are headquartered abroad, which creates jurisdictional difficulties, since enforcing India’s rules against foreign entities typically requires cross-border cooperation.[28] Differences between legal systems can complicate both investigation and enforcement.

8.6 BALANCING CONSUMER PROTECTION AND INNOVATION

Consumer rights need protecting, but regulation that goes too far risks stifling technological innovation, since digital businesses need room to build better services and improve the user experience. Regulation should therefore aim to stop deceptive practices without choking off genuine innovation  a balance that matters for the digital economy’s long-term, sustainable growth.

9. SUGGESTIONS AND THE WAY FORWARD

India has already taken meaningful steps to regulate dark patterns, though further work could make consumer protection stronger and encourage more ethical digital business conduct.

9.1 INCREASE CONSUMER AWARENESS

Consumer awareness remains one of the most effective defences against digital manipulation. Government bodies, educational institutions, consumer groups, and digital platforms should run outreach programmes that explain the various forms dark patterns take and the legal remedies open to consumers, since consumers who understand the problem are better equipped to spot deceptive practice and report it.

9.2 REGULAR REVIEW OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Given how quickly technology changes and new forms of dark patterns emerge, the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 should be revisited at regular intervals so that newly identified deceptive practices are incorporated and the framework keeps pace.[29]

9.3 STRENGTHEN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

The CCPA should continue to invest in technology-driven monitoring capable of detecting deceptive interface design, using artificial intelligence and digital analytics to identify violations more efficiently.[30] The consumer-complaint process should also stay simple, accessible, and capable of producing quick resolutions.

9.4 DEVELOPMENT OF JUDICIAL PRINCIPLES

As more disputes involving dark patterns reach Indian courts, the resulting judicial decisions will help clarify principles on informed consent, transparency, unfair trade practices, and consumer autonomy, giving both consumers and businesses greater certainty going forward.

CONCLUSION

The fast growth of digital commerce has made online shopping and digital services considerably more convenient, but it has also fuelled the spread of dark patterns that shape consumer decisions through misleading and unfair design. Such practices undercut transparency, get in the way of informed decision-making, and erode consumer trust in online transactions. India has responded with meaningful steps — the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, and the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 with the Central Consumer Protection Authority playing a central role in holding businesses to fair and transparent conduct. Legal rules by themselves are not enough, though: effective consumer protection also calls for wider public awareness, firmer enforcement, more responsible business conduct, and periodic updates to the legal framework as technology keeps evolving. A digital marketplace that is genuinely fair and trustworthy can only emerge when businesses respect consumer choice and consumers are free to decide without the influence of deceptive design. Regulating dark patterns is, in that sense, a vital step toward stronger consumer rights and a more ethical digital economy in India.

REFERENCES

1. Harry Brignull, Bringing Dark Patterns to Light, Medium (June 6, 2021), https://harrybr.medium.com/bringing-dark-patterns-to-light-d86f24224ebf.
2. CCPA Issues Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 – Effective 30 November 2023, Mondaq (Dec. 4, 2023).
3. Dark Patterns Banned: Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, Lexology (Dec. 6, 2023).
4. Regulatory Crackdown on Dark Patterns: CCPA’s Enforcement Actions and Emerging Compliance Landscape in Indian E-Commerce, AZB & Partners (Oct. 6, 2025).
5. Dark Patterns and Weak Remedies: Why the CCPA Advisory Falls Short, Internet Freedom Foundation (June 23, 2025).
6. Click, Buy, Regret: The Dark Patterns Within Online Platforms, Forbes India (Nov. 26, 2025).
7. India’s CCPA Guidelines on Dark Patterns: Welcome Signal, but Law Is Still Soft, IAPP (Sept. 25, 2025).
8. Dark Patterns in Digital Platforms: India’s Rules & Guidelines, Neeti Niyaman (Sept. 10, 2025).
9. Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, Dhwaj & Associates

STATUTES REFERRED

1. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019
2. The Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020
3. The Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023,
4. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986  (repealed).

CASE LAWS REFERRED

1. Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Ltd. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly, (1986) 3 S.C.C. 156
2. National Seeds Corporation Ltd. v. M. Madhusudhan Reddy, (2012) 2 S.C.C. 506
3. Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände v. Planet49 GmbH, ECLI:EU:C:2019:801
4. Specht v. Netscape Communications Corp., 306 F.3d 17 (2d Cir. 2002).
5. In re Epic Games, Inc., FTC File No. 1923203 (F.T.C. Dec. 19, 2022).

[1]Consumer Protection Act, 2019, No. 35 of 2019, India Code (2019).

[2]Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, G.S.R. 462(E) (July 23, 2020) (India).

[3]Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, F. No. CCPA-1/1/2023-CCPA-(Reg) (Nov. 30, 2023) (India).

[4]Harry Brignull, Bringing Dark Patterns to Light, Medium (June 6, 2021), https://harrybr.medium.com/bringing-dark-patterns-to-light-d86f24224ebf.

[5]Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, cl. 3, supra note 3.

[6]Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, Annexure I, supra note 3.

[7]Dark Patterns Decoded: India’s Legal and Regulatory Guide, Lexology (May 11, 2026), https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c9963888-f71c-4140-b068-bbbab6f5fe42.

[8]Regulatory Crackdown on Dark Patterns: CCPA’s Enforcement Actions and Emerging Compliance Landscape in Indian E-Commerce, AZB & Partners (Oct. 6, 2025), https://www.azbpartners.com/bank/regulatory-crackdown-on-dark-patterns-ccpas-enforcement-actions-and-emerging-compliance-landscape-in-indian-e-commerce/.

[9]Dark Patterns and Weak Remedies: Why the CCPA Advisory Falls Short, Internet Freedom Found. (June 23, 2025), https://internetfreedom.in/dark-patterns-and-weak-remedies-why-the-ccpa-advisory-falls-short/.

[10]Dark Patterns Banned: Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, Lexology (Dec. 6, 2023), https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9cfe087c-3d30-4dfa-b7e8-b62087b65e15.

[11]CCPA Issues Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, JSA (Dec. 8, 2023), https://www.jsalaw.com/newsletters-and-updates/ccpa-issues-guidelines-for-prevention-and-regulation-of-dark-patterns-2023/.

[12]Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, cl. 5(9), supra note 3 (defining “disguised advertisement”).

[13]Consumer Protection Act, 2019, § 10, supra note 1.

[14]Consumer Protection Act, 2019, § 2(47), supra note 1.

[15]Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, r. 5, supra note 2.

[16]Consumer Protection Act, 2019, § 18, supra note 1.

[17]CCPA Issues Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 – Effective 30 November 2023, Mondaq (Dec. 4, 2023), https://www.mondaq.com/india/consumer-trading-unfair-trading/1398262/ccpa-issues-guidelines-for-prevention-and-regulation-of-dark-patterns-2023-effective-30-november-2023.

[18]Central Inland Water Transp. Corp. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly, (1986) 3 S.C.C. 156 (India).

[19]National Seeds Corp. v. M. Madhusudhan Reddy, (2012) 2 S.C.C. 506 (India).

[20]Case C-673/17, Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände v. Planet49 GmbH, ECLI:EU:C:2019:801 (Oct. 1, 2019).

[21]Specht v. Netscape Commc’ns Corp., 306 F.3d 17 (2d Cir. 2002).

[22]In re Epic Games, Inc., FTC File No. 1923203 (F.T.C. Dec. 19, 2022) (stipulated order).

[23]India’s CCPA Guidelines on Dark Patterns: Welcome Signal, but Law Is Still Soft, IAPP (Sept. 25, 2025), https://iapp.org/news/a/india-s-ccpa-guidelines-on-dark-patterns-welcome-signal-but-law-is-still-soft.

[24]Regulatory Crackdown On Dark Patterns: CCPA’s Enforcement Actions And Emerging Compliance Landscape In Indian E-Commerce, Mondaq (Oct. 2, 2025), https://www.mondaq.com/india/dodd-frank-consumer-protection-act/1686226/regulatory-crackdown-on-dark-patterns-ccpas-enforcement-actions-and-emerging-compliance-landscape-in-indian-e-commerce.

[25]Dark Patterns and Weak Remedies: Why the CCPA Advisory Falls Short, supra note 9 (discussing the CCPA notice dated February 11, 2025 to BookMyShow).

[26]Click, Buy, Regret: The Dark Patterns Within Online Platforms, Forbes India (Nov. 26, 2025), https://www.forbesindia.com/article/upfront/take-one-big-story-of-the-day/click-buy-regret-the-dark-patterns-within-online-platforms/2988954/1.

[27]Click, Buy, Regret: The Dark Patterns Within Online Platforms, supra note 26 (citing a LocalCircles survey finding that about 97 percent of surveyed online platforms employed dark patterns).

[28]Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, Dhwaj & Associates, https://www.dalaw.in/Guidelines%20for%20prevention%20and%20regulation%20of%20dark%20patterns,%202023 (last visited July 17, 2026) (discussing the extraterritorial application of the Guidelines).

[29]Dark Patterns Banned: Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, supra note 10 (discussing the Advertising Standards Council of India’s discussion paper, Dark Patterns – The New Threat to Consumer Protection (Nov. 2022), and its Guidelines for Online Deceptive Design Patterns in Advertising (June 15, 2023)).

[30]Dark Patterns in Digital Platforms: India’s Rules & Guidelines, Neeti Niyaman (Sept. 10, 2025), https://neetiniyaman.com/dark-patterns-digital-platforms/ (discussing Case No. CCPA-2/35/2024-CCPA, In re Rapido (Roppen Transp. Servs. Pvt. Ltd.)).