Honey Class Action: Browser Extension Accused of Stealing Commissions

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit claims Honey's browser extension steals commissions from content creators by replacing their affiliate marketing links.

Consumers Affected: Content creators who use affiliate marketing programs.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division

PayPal’s Honey browser extension is under fire for allegedly stealing commissions from online creators by replacing their affiliate marketing links with its own. A new class action lawsuit accuses Honey of a scheme that deprives content creators of income they earned through affiliate programs—an essential revenue source for many influencers and YouTubers.

Filed in California federal court, the lawsuit seeks compensation for lost earnings and aims to prevent Honey from continuing the alleged practice.

Honey Accused of Stealing Commissions from Content Creators

Honey, a popular tool among online shoppers, finds and applies coupon codes during checkout, promising savings on purchases. But according to the lawsuit, the extension also replaces affiliate marketing cookies—used to track and credit sales to creators—with its own at the last second before checkout.

This means when a customer buys a product through a creator’s referral link, Honey allegedly takes credit for the sale. The practice, called “last-click attribution sniping,” diverts the commission to Honey instead of the creator who recommended the product.

PayPal acquired Honey for $4 billion in 2020, making it a major player in the eCommerce space. With over 17 million daily users, Honey’s alleged actions could have a massive financial impact on creators relying on affiliate marketing.

Lawsuit Alleges Honey's Practices Harm the Creator Economy

Two creators, Eli Silva and Ashley Gardiner, are leading the lawsuit on behalf of others affected.

Silva, who runs the “Deep Discount Club” YouTube channel and social media accounts, earns commissions from promoting products through affiliate links. He claims that Honey’s interference has cost him significant income.

Gardiner, who shares product recommendations via her social media account “Once Upon a Minivan,” says she has similarly lost earnings when Honey allegedly replaced her referral tags during checkout. Both plaintiffs argue they spend substantial time and money building audiences and promoting products, only to have their commissions unfairly diverted by Honey.

Through the lawsuit, the pair want compensation for creators to recover the revenue they lost due to Honey’s alleged link sniping and they are asking the court to block Honey from continuing its current practices.

The lawsuit also raises broader concerns about how such behavior affects the entire creator economy. Creators rely on platforms like YouTube and Instagram to host content for free, funded by advertising revenue. If advertisers lose faith in the reliability of affiliate programs due to practices like Honey’s, it could reduce overall ad spending and harm creators who don’t use affiliate links but depend on ad revenue.

Devin Stone, a lawyer and creator known as LegalEagle, who is also suing Honey in a separate case says the lawsuits aren’t only about affiliate commissions but are about the integrity of the entire online advertising system.

In their lawsuit, Silva and Gardiner want to represent anyone in the US who participated in an affiliate commission program with a US-based eCommerce merchant and had commissions diverted to Paypal as a result of the Honey browser extension. 

They are suing for unjust enrichment, violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, interference with prospective economic advantage, and conversion, and are seeking injunctive relief, damages, disgorgement, interest, costs, and fees, 

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Silva, et al. v. Paypal Holdings, Inc.
• Case Number: 5:24-cv-09510-SVK 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Dena C. Sharp, Adam E. Polk, and Simon S. Grille (Girard Sharp LLP)
• Gary M. Klinger and Alexandra M. Honeycutt (Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman, PLLC)

Are you a content creator who uses affiliate marketing? Share your thoughts on this lawsuit in the comments below.