Roku Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over "Bricking" Older Devices
A new lawsuit alleges Roku is deliberately disabling older streaming devices with software updates to force upgrades. An installer's take — what happens to your existing Roku, and the lesson for any streaming device purchase in 2026.
The headline
A new class-action lawsuit accuses Roku of deliberately disabling — "bricking" — older streaming devices through software updates that force users to buy new hardware. The filing, reported by Cord Cutters News (one of the better cord-cutting outlets following this beat), alleges that the practice is intentional, that affected devices were within their reasonable useful life, and that Roku's update behavior amounts to forced obsolescence.
The legal merits will play out in court. The underlying behavior — older Roku devices losing functionality through forced updates — is something I have seen in client homes for years. It's not new. The legal framing of it as a class action might be.
What is actually being alleged
The lawsuit claims that Roku has pushed firmware updates to older Roku devices (specifically, the Roku Streaming Stick, Express, Express+, and various pre-2020 boxes) that:
- Remove access to previously-working apps without notice
- Slow down devices to a point where they become effectively unusable
- Force-install software changes that the user cannot reject
- Display upgrade prompts in increasingly intrusive ways
The plaintiffs argue this is functionally identical to disabling a working product the customer already paid for — and that Roku's update Terms of Service, written to grant them broad rights to push updates, don't override consumer-protection laws.
Roku has not commented publicly on the suit as of this writing. The case is in early procedural stages and will likely take 12–24 months to resolve, with the most probable outcome being a settlement that includes some form of consumer credit or remediation.
What I see in client homes
Bear and I have installed and replaced hundreds of Roku devices across his cable-era career and my 22 years in residential AV. Here's the pattern:
Roku Streaming Stick (1st-3rd gen, 2014–2018): Still technically powered on as of 2026, but unusable in practice. Apps drop off. The interface is sluggish to the point of unresponsive. Most clients with these devices reach a frustration point and buy a new one within 5–7 years of the original purchase.
Roku Express / Express+ (2017–2019 era): Similar pattern. The device works "okay" for the first 3–4 years, then progressively degrades through firmware updates that make the experience worse rather than better.
Roku Premiere, Ultra, and newer 4K boxes (2020+): Better. These devices have meaningfully better hardware and the degradation pattern is slower. A 2020 Roku Ultra still works fine in 2026.
The class action is essentially saying: the pre-2020 devices were configured by Roku's update behavior to push consumers into the post-2020 boxes — and that pattern was not random.
What to do if you own an older Roku
If your Roku still works for what you watch: Keep it. Don't preemptively upgrade just because of a lawsuit you read about. The hardware doesn't suddenly fail because Roku is being sued.
If your Roku is slow or apps keep dropping off: This is the failure mode the lawsuit is about. Two options:
- Replace with a new Roku. The current Roku Ultra (2024) at $79–$99 is genuinely a strong box. The Streaming Stick 4K at $29–$49 is excellent value. If you like Roku, replacing it with new Roku hardware is fine.
- Replace with a different platform entirely. This is the option more clients are choosing in 2026. If you've been frustrated with Roku, the Apple TV 4K (3rd gen) at $129–$149 has the longest software-support window of any streaming device on the market — typically 6+ years before Apple stops supporting a generation. The Onn 4K Pro at $50 from Walmart runs current Google TV and is a budget alternative.
Don't fall for the Roku trade-in offers. Roku regularly runs "trade-in your old Roku, get $X off a new Roku" promotions. The trade-in credit is almost always less than the resale value of the old device or the savings from buying a competitor on sale. Decide based on what you actually want to own next, not what the manufacturer is incentivizing.
The bigger lesson — buying a streaming device in 2026
The Roku lawsuit isn't actually about Roku specifically. It's about an industry-wide practice. Every streaming device manufacturer — Roku, Amazon (Fire TV), Google (Chromecast / Google TV), Apple (Apple TV), Nvidia (Shield) — has some version of software-update behavior that affects older hardware. Some manufacturers do this aggressively. Some do it gently.
Here's the honest installer-level take on how to buy a streaming device in 2026 with this risk in mind:
Buy from manufacturers with long support windows. Apple's track record is the strongest — Apple TV 4K boxes from 2017 still get current software updates in 2026, 9 years later. Nvidia Shield boxes from 2019 still get updates. Roku and Fire TV have meaningfully shorter useful lives — historically 4–6 years before degradation kicks in.
Don't buy the cheapest device available if you'll be irritated when it stops working. A $29 stick is a great buy for a guest room. It is not a great buy for your main TV if you'll be frustrated when it slows down in year four. Spend $80–$130 on the main TV. Spend $30–$50 on secondary TVs.
Plan for a 4–5 year replacement cycle on the budget tier, 6–8 years on the premium tier. This is just the reality of consumer electronics in 2026. The economics don't support hardware that lasts 15 years like a TV used to.
What I would do if this were my house — Roku owner
Right now? Nothing. Don't react to a lawsuit. Use what you have until it stops working for you.
When it does stop working — or you want to upgrade for other reasons — buy based on which platform fits your household best. Our streaming device reviews cover every major option honestly, including Roku, Apple TV, Fire TV, Google TV, Nvidia Shield, Onn 4K Pro, and TiVo. Pick by household fit, not by which manufacturer is in the news this week.
Sources & credits
This week's coverage of the Roku story leaned on:
- Cord Cutters News — The original reporting on the class-action filing ran on their YouTube channel. Cord Cutters News tracks this beat closely and broke the story before most mainstream outlets picked it up. Credit to them for the original reporting.
- Public court filings — The actual class-action complaint is filed in U.S. District Court and is publicly available via PACER.
The installer-level perspective — what to do if you own an older Roku, the broader lesson on buying any streaming device — is from years of installing and replacing these devices in client homes. The lawsuit is news. The pattern it describes is not.