5 ms·

Amazon didn't handle any of the merchandise. It's Amazon Marketplace so it works like ebay, they just host the listing and process payments while the seller doe

by moftz 9y ago

Amazon didn't handle any of the merchandise. It's Amazon Marketplace so it works like ebay, they just host the listing and process payments while the seller does all the shipment and the buyer is the one actually importing the counterfeit goods (this is what is illegal in the US). I don't think Amazon is the one at fault for the crime necessarily but they should be proactive in taking down counterfeit listings to prevent this. I've bought things on ebay before for what seemed like a fair price and it turned out to be counterfeit. I don't blame ebay for that but I wouldn't be happy if the same post was still up after I reported it for counterfeiting.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> I don't think Amazon is the one at fault for the crime Responsibility for a wrongdoing is not always restricted to one party; in this case there is one party active trying to commit a fraud involving counterfeit goods, and one profiting from a system which is structured so as to enable that fraud and make it difficult for the target to detect or avoid (which may initially have been innocent, but has been maintained that way long after the operator had information on which they reasonably should have known that was a recurring and significant issue.)
- lsaferite 9y ago
  So you are saying any marketplace (e.g. Ebay) is actually responsible for a merchant using them to facilitate fraud? Why stop there? Let's find the merchant processor complicit and the shipping company and the ISPs. Heck, I'm sure we could extend the net further if we wanted. Point being, unless the marketplace is actively courting merchants they know are perpetuating fraud, then how are they at fault? If they get a report of a seller that is selling counterfeit goods, they take them down. What more do you expect of them?
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > So you are saying any marketplace (e.g. Ebay) is actually responsible for a merchant using them to facilitate fraud? No, I'm saying a marketplace that knows, or reasonably should know of an ongoing pattern of fraud enabled and protected by features of its marketplace that does not take reasonable steps to mitigate that fraud but instead chooses to continue to allow and profit from it bears responsibility for it.

by moftz 9y ago

dragonwriter 9y ago

> I don't think Amazon is the one at fault for the crime Responsibility for a wrongdoing is not always restricted to one party; in this case there is one party active trying to commit a fraud involving counterfeit goods, and one profiting from a system which is structured so as to enable that fraud and make it difficult for the target to detect or avoid (which may initially have been innocent, but has been maintained that way long after the operator had information on which they reasonably should have known that was a recurring and significant issue.)

lsaferite 9y ago
So you are saying any marketplace (e.g. Ebay) is actually responsible for a merchant using them to facilitate fraud? Why stop there? Let's find the merchant processor complicit and the shipping company and the ISPs. Heck, I'm sure we could extend the net further if we wanted. Point being, unless the marketplace is actively courting merchants they know are perpetuating fraud, then how are they at fault? If they get a report of a seller that is selling counterfeit goods, they take them down. What more do you expect of them?
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > So you are saying any marketplace (e.g. Ebay) is actually responsible for a merchant using them to facilitate fraud? No, I'm saying a marketplace that knows, or reasonably should know of an ongoing pattern of fraud enabled and protected by features of its marketplace that does not take reasonable steps to mitigate that fraud but instead chooses to continue to allow and profit from it bears responsibility for it.