13 ms·

Amazon Is Complicit in Online Sales of Counterfeit Goods: Report

253 points by vezycash 8y ago

joering2 8y ago
Bezos versus Ulbricht (in the past): - both run very successful online store - both never sold counterfeit or illegal products themselves; only offered software (website) to sell products by others - bezos found not guilty for harm and damages from products sold thru his website because he didnt offer it himself - bezos hires 50,000 employees in his own city, giving him God-status jail-free card (which prosecutor or politician wants to see headlines like "Bezos sent to jail, 50000 people unemployed") - ulbricht goes to jail for life without possibility of parole because someone (we don't even know his name) used his website to sell drug that killed a buyer Note to myself: when you grow big and break rules, like Ulbricht or Bezos do, make sure you have thousands of employees working for you, so that you become untouchable! Or face lifetime jail.
- mikeyouse 8y ago
  Ridiculous comparison aside, Ulbrecht sold a trashbag full of mushrooms on the Silk Road. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/silk-road-trial-fbi-reveals-whats-on-ross-ulbrichts-computer-in-open-court/%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201...
  - empath75 8y ago
    He also attempted to hire an assassin.
    - mikeyouse 8y ago
      And kept a diary where he admitted to all of this.
    - afsina 8y ago
      I thought that was debunked already. (If here is credible https://freeross.org https://freeross.org )
      - mikeyouse 8y ago
        Not remotely debunked. He definitely tried to hire multiple hits. He kept a diary of that part too. For his technical chops, he was not a smart guy.
        afsina 8y ago
        Care to point to credible links? After I dig deeper, seems like he was not really took any sentence on the hit-hiring account. Isn't that absurd?
        mikeyouse 8y ago
        Nah, not really. Two things: 1. Although they didn't charge the attempted hits as separate crimes, they did take them into consideration when they sentenced him. His sentence was longer specifically because the judge believed there was a preponderance of evidence that he hired hitmen and intended to have five people murdered. 2. While under oath, nobody from Ross's side denied that he had hired the hits. They insisted that he was "role-playing" and didn't expect anyone to be killed. Except he paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (visible on the blockchain) to strangers after they sent him 'proof' that the hits were carried out. Proof that included random numbers that Ross provided to ensure the hits were actually carried out. People who say Ross was a good guy are lying or are uninformed. From the sentencing document (Page 17 onward: https://www.scribd.com/doc/283722300/Ross-Ulbricht-Sentencing#from_embed https://www.scribd.com/doc/283722300/Ross-Ulbricht-Sentencin...): > Ulbricht's directed violence here is and relates to the murders for hire which he is alleged to have commissioned and paid for. The Court must determine whether these allegations have been demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence and I find that there is ample and unambiguous evidence that Ulbricht commissioned five murders as part of his efforts to protect his criminal enterprise and that he paid for these murders. There is no evidence that he was role-playing. > The Court finds that the evidence is clear and unambiguous and it far exceeds the necessary preponderance findings, that Ulbricht believed he was paying for murders of those he wanted eliminated, and that he believed they had in fact been murdered. He was told his first victim had a wife and several children. That fact was known to Ulbricht and it is never mentioned by him in connection with his consideration of the murder. The consequences flowing from the murder of a man with his family is never, so far as the Court can tell from the record, considered. > When he commissioned the hit on other of what he thought was one person, Tony76, he learned that Tony76 was apparently someplace -- located someplace with three other individuals. Ulbricht then agreed and paid for a hit on all four of them. There is no evidence in the record that he knew them -- these other three folks -- that he ever dealt with these three folks or had any beef with them at all. He commissioned the hit without regard to who they were, to the fact that they had a right to life. He never asked if they had families, he never expressed any concern for them at all. > The evidence of this murderous intent and the actions specifically taken by Ulbricht to commission the hits is based on trial exhibits including Ulbricht's own journal and his chats with the individuals he hired to oversee the murders and it was not, as I have said, role-playing. > He commissioned the hits, there is no discussion of hypotheticals, he paid actual funds. He paid hundreds of thousands of dollars which were, in fact, paid. He is told when the murders are completed, he was provided with a photo of the murder scene with random numbers that he had provided to the would-be assassins. That there had been no confirmation of any of the deaths does not eliminate the fact that he directed violence and directed the use of violence.
- rwmj 8y ago
  This is such rubbish. What do you think would happen to senior officers of Amazon if they pivoted the company to selling illegal drugs?
  - scarface74 8y ago
    See what happens when big business wants to start selling marijuanna. It's no longer about being "tough on crime", it's about how quickly we can legalize it.
    - XalvinX 8y ago
      In that case I hope Sandoz wants to start selling one of it's famous products again soon...
- praneshp 8y ago
  Peak HN, and it's not even 9:45 PDT
- mschuster91 8y ago
  To the downvoters: the comparison isn't without merit imho. The fact that the stuff one could source on SR was in most of all cases pure and free from common dangerous stretching agents (e.g. fentanly-laced cocaine) alone probably saved dozens of lives. If there were no SR, then people would have gotten their drugs from the street instead. Meanwhile Amazon is happily selling Nazi merchandise (which, while legal, is simply disgusting) and stuff like counterfeit car parts, batteries, chargers and other electronics goods that literally can kill people. And, contrary to SR, there is no incentive for either Amazon or the 3rd party sellers to maintain proper business ethics. On SR, you'd deliver a bad charge of drugs and you'd be outta business because people would downvote you. On Amazon literally no one cares and even if you do manage to report stuff to them nothing happens.
brian_herman 8y ago
Can anyone verify this?
- benologist 8y ago
  Counterfeit stuff on Amazon has been in the news so many times at this point Bezos being unaware would be like Zuckerburg feigning surprise about privacy concerns on Facebook.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
dawhizkid 8y ago
If Amazon ever faces a reckoning or crisis of some kind, it will because their marketplace product is totally out of control. Sellers have completely gamed search, ratings, reviews, everything and Amazon, by design, makes it really hard to tell if you're buying something "shipped and sold by Amazon" vs some other shady seller whose products are only being fulfilled by Amazon. I would say I'm more dissatisfied with things I buy from Amazon than almost any other merchant, and now I only buy things on Amazon if it's 1) either sold directly by Amazon (which is increasingly hard to find) or 2) really cheap and where questionable quality is not a concern. Egregious example: Type in "wireless headphones" and the top results look like what you'd find on a corner in Chinatown than a legitimate electronics store.
- p49k 8y ago
  Even items “shipped and sold by amazon” can often be counterfeit. Below is one example, but I’ve also read on HN of someone receiving a dangerous fake Apple adapter that was “sold and shipped by Amazon”, and I have personally bought shampoo from Amazon that I’m pretty certain was counterfeit. http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/amazon-is-tricking-consumers-with-its-ships-from-and-sold-by-amazon-label-per-new-suit http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/amazon-is-tricking-consume...
  - bapbap 8y ago
    I've wondered if Amazon co-locates its own stock with that of Fulfillment By Amazon stock which would mean you could end up with anything as long as it looks similar and has the same SKU.
    - inapis 8y ago
      This is exactly what happens. Items from different sellers are mixed together and then randomly dispatched by Amazon under their own name.
      - bapbap 8y ago
        Ah, it makes sense to do so but I'd imagine this practice would affect consumer confidence in Sold by Amazon options given time.
vpribish 8y ago
there's not much to that article, it's all weasel-words, insinuation, and qualifiers. Amazon does have an obvious counterfeit problem, and I'd love to read a real account of just what is being done and why it's so ineffective. tl;dr : skip it
jostmey 8y ago
I bought a baby product from amazon. It gave off an immense smell that made me noxious (I don't want to know what my baby was thinking). I threw it away and contacted the company. The company pointed out that the product I had is slightly different from their product and is a counterfeit. It is a huge problem. I don't buy baby products from amazon anymore. Once, amazon shipped me an opened can of any formula
crb002 8y ago
He also makes it really easy for IP owners to track down counterfeit supply chains. Free discovery to sue pirates.
Exuma 8y ago
Time for me to mention https://www.fakespot.com/ https://www.fakespot.com/
coleifer 8y ago
I bought some cologne from them and figured it was safe because the seller was posted as Amazon. Got it and the original barcode had been excised with a razor and replaced with a sticker. Scent and bottle were fake. When I wrote a dispassionate and factual review with pics it was removed with no recourse or explanation. Very sketchy.
- sytse 8y ago
  They tend to remove the original barcode if they sell at a discount because otherwise the wholesaler/manufacturer will not sell to them again. This is not illegal. If anything it is an indication the product was real.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > They tend to remove the original barcode if they sell at a discount because otherwise the wholesaler/manufacturer will not sell to them again. Why would the wholesaler care?
    - nostromo 8y ago
      Often these are gray market items. If I sell Product X in America for $50 and in China for $5, I would not want retailers selling the Chinese product in America.
  - coleifer 8y ago
    This makes no fucking sense. They could have just covered the old barcode with the sticker but someone had taken care to carefully cut it out. As I wrote, the whole reason I got suspicious in the first place is the scent itself was wrong. The bottle, too. I had an old one I'd bought from a department store to compare against.
    - robryan 8y ago
      It needs to be cut out, the point being that the brand can't identify who they originally sold the product to. The brand may take a hard line of their authorized sellers diverting to the grey market. The authorized sellers want to keep being authorized sellers.
21 8y ago
I recently bought Windows 10 Pro license from Amazon for $10 (normal price is $80). It had over 600 ratings, tens of positive reviews along the line "if it doesn't work immediately, phone Microsoft and they will fix it for you". It worked immediately for me. Apparently they are Windows licenses recovered from broken laptops and such, but anyway.
jfoster 8y ago
"Amazon’s official stance, as outlined by these e-mails, counterfeit products will continue to be listed on Amazon’s website in countries where the trademark covering the brand isn’t registered." So they try to do what the law requires them to. The flaw in this approach is that consumers could end up with fake stuff in countries where trademarks aren't registered. Whilst that might be within the law, it's still a shitty experience for consumers.
- unreal37 8y ago
  You're assuming customers care about the manufacturer of the product at all. For batteries, cables, earbuds, paper, dog toys, etc etc etc - the customer does not care who the manufacturer is as long as the item is good quality.
  - azernik 8y ago
    And there's the rub: as long as the item is good quality. The main reason for trademarks, economically speaking, is to increase information flow in the marketplace. If some seller claims they have good quality products, you have to just trust them; if they have a trademark and you know that they have a reputation for quality, that trust can be much more accurate. Where Amazon messes this up is in the intermingling of reviews and inventory for genuine and counterfeit trademarked products, so that customers can't tell whether they're getting Apple-quality or random-Chinese-manufacturer quality chargers, which will either be super-safe or will blow up their devices. I'm totally okay with buying a battery from a third party, as long as the real manufacturer is clearly indicated and I can check up on the reviews of their build quality.
  - smittywerben 8y ago
    I'd prefer non-counterfit batteries. If one explodes, who is liable?
  - loco5niner 8y ago
    Actually, I've found that the best way to guarantee I'm buying a quality product is to shop by brand. I assume that is highly but not completely correlated with manufacturer.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
skort 8y ago
It seems like the only metric Amazon is optimizing for is number of items sold, and this seems to be the natural progression of a system where that is the primary goal. Making a change that decreases the sale of counterfeit products is a change that reduces the sale of products, and in Amazon's case, also leased warehouse space (FBA), and who knows what else - all of which are likely negative metrics. It's telling, that in the update to the Elevation Lab blog post, it's noted that Amazon doesn't allow 3rd party sellers to sell Amazon Basics products. https://www.elevationlab.com/blogs/news/amazon-is-complicit-with-counterfeit-sellers# https://www.elevationlab.com/blogs/news/amazon-is-complicit-...
XalvinX 8y ago
Well, you know what he will say...the same thing everyone says. The same thing Google says about the rampant copyright theft their platform allows. The same thing Facebook says about bullying, fake news, and the like. The same thing Napster and PirateBay say about their services. The same thing Photoshop would say about people counterfeiting stuff using that. The same thing Bitcoin people (or for that matter, the Federal Reserve system) say about people using their coins for illegal purchases. The same thing the National Park Service says about people falling off of cliffs. These are all just platforms, and cannot reasonably be held responsible for the action of all their users all of the time. And I think any reasonable-minded person, and most judges, have to see it that way too. This "complicit" is a misuse of the English language, I think. Bezos is not in cahoots with the counterfeiters here. That is nonsense. People have been accultured to expect some kind of protection everywhere, all the time. Well, guess what? It's a big world and there are a lot of scammers out there, and nobody can protect you all the time. You have to learn how to protect yourself. Amazon's review system is one way to protect yourself. I think it isn't bad at all. Read what other people have to say about a product and the vendor before giving up your credit card info.
- rubicon33 8y ago
  Really the question is are they doing enough to stop it? The National Park Service, at least, put up guide wires and a warning sign on dangerous trails.
  - XalvinX 8y ago
    Umm...not true. There is no rail on the edge of Half Dome..you can literally hang your feet off the edge, as I have done....and it was pretty cool.
    - lisper 8y ago
      At least on Half Dome it is hard to miss the fact that you are approaching the edge, and that this entails risk. Amazon is deliberately obscuring the risks by making it appear that products are vetted and/or endorsed, either by them or by customers, when in fact they are not. Even the review system, which you praised in your OP, is easily gamed.
adamio 8y ago
Manufacturers selling on Amazon should include QR coded key that can be verified as authentic
- archgoon 8y ago
  Sounds like the start of a good idea; but a few implementation issues. 1) Steal one QR code, it can then be duplicated. 2) Works well for the situation where Amazon is not simply connecting you directly to the seller, but not when the seller ships directly to you. (2) could be potentially modified to have brands insist that amazon themselves act as the final shipper (so it would be sent to their warehouses and verified). (1) is tough one to crack. A transaction ledger would prevent the duplication problem; but may have scaling issues since you'd potentially need to verify the physical objects on receipt. It also doesn't deal with the situation where the product itself can be decomposed for parts and sold separately (like some electronics). Then the QR code can be used to sell an inferior replacement product (an empty box). Though the QR code + transaction ledger is probably a necessary first step to dealing with this issue.
  - colejohnson66 8y ago
    > A transaction ledger... Did I hear AmazonCoin? /s
    - archgoon 8y ago
      No, why? Why would Amazon issue a coin system? That is only needed when you need to incentivize people to perform computation on your behalf.
lph 8y ago
I really, really want to hear the other side to this. That there is a serious counterfeiting problem is obvious to anyone who buys certain categories of products on Amazon. It is certainly obvious to Amazon itself. BUT Amazon is also a very customer focused company. So how has this not been solved? Critics will speculate that Amazon makes more money with this status quo, thus has little incentive to fix things. But that calculus doesn't make any sense---maybe in a very narrow balance sheet view, but Amazon has always taken a long view on these things, and there's no way the long term damage to their brand is worth whatever they make from sketchy third-party sellers. It doesn't add up. There must be something else factored in that I'm missing.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  I'm skeptical of your claim that Amazon is a customer-focused company. They're definitely a growth-focused company. At times in their history, and for certain aspects of the business, that has made them customer-focused. In many other regards (like making sure the customer gets the product they want) they're clearly not at all customer-focused. They won't address this until it begins to visibly impact their marketplace dominance.
  - CodeWriter23 8y ago
    Amazon’s slogan is “The most customer-centric company on Earth”. It seems like customer care should be a top priority. But it’s not. Especially for customers who pay Amazon for marketing and logistical services.
    - csytan 8y ago
      Sellers are customers too, but I think that in this context it means the people who make purchases on Amazon.
  - lph 8y ago
    Amazon's customer service is legendary. It's why this whole thing is such a mystery. If Comcast were doing something so bad for customers, nobody would be surprised.
kylecordes 8y ago
I've been an Amazon customer since 1998, and this problem has shifted my buying away from Amazon, for categories where counterfeiting seems likely. If they offered an option to simply never see any items with that (idiotic) co-mingled counterfeit-prone inventory management scheme, I'd happily pay a bit more to get things which I am confident went directly from the real manufacture, to Amazon, to me. Which of course is exactly what I do... by not shopping for such items at Amazon. Truly the whole thing makes me wonder what kind of thinking could be going on. They have an amazing juggernaut of success going, all they have to do is not screw it up by doing anything especially stupid. Like this.
- dahdum 8y ago
  I used to do virtually all my buying on Amazon, their supply chain mess has moved me to about half. I honestly never thought I’d step foot in a Best Buy or Frys again, but for branded merchandise it’s far safer to do so.
  - walterbell 8y ago
    Have done the same. Price match and same day in-store pickup is faster than Amazon at the same price.
carapace 8y ago
Buries the lede. If you click through to the press release https://thecounterfeitreport.com/press_release_details.php?date=2018-06-05&id=762 https://thecounterfeitreport.com/press_release_details.php?d... > In repeated emails from Amazon opening with "Jeff Bezos received your email and I am responding on his behalf," The Counterfeit Report, a consumer advocate and industry watchdog, has been informed that inarguable counterfeit items will not be removed from many of Amazon's various 13 global websites. Amazon uses a crafty excuse: "Trademarks must be validly registered for European countries to take action on European nations" or "Your trademark must be in registered status in [each country the item is sold in]." So they will actually let known counterfeits be sold freely in countries where the brand isn't trademarked. Further, and worse IMHO, is this: > For example, the counterfeit items below were repeatedly purchased from the same Amazon sellers and shipped to the USA. > ... Replica current issue U.S. Secret Service, FBI and police badges are available on Amazon... > Notices to Amazon management for of [sic] the alarming practice have been ignored. The items remain.
cornholio 8y ago
> There is something extremely simple Amazon could do about [counterfeit products]. If you have a registered brand in the Brand Registry and don’t sell the product wholesale – there could be one box to check for that. And anyone else would have to get approval or high vetting to sell the product, especially if they are sending large quantities to FBA. I imagine there are some algorithmic solutions that could catch most of it too… Why Amazon doesn’t do this is mind-blowing Because producers would immediately check any box that needs to be checked in order to become the single supplier of their brand on Amazon. It's immensely valuable to control all sales on the largest online store in the world, while at the same time maintaining a discriminatory pricing structure on various markets without being undercut online by your own distributors. Amazon would effectively let brand owners gouge their customers and reduce Amazon overall competitivity and appeal.
vernie 8y ago
Amazon's commingling of items from different sellers is simply insane.
mindslight 8y ago
I generally support grey markets - including works-well-enough brand-imitating goods, and free trade that undermines unjust cartel/vice laws. Like when it clicks that the domain ipwatchdog.com isn't about the Internet Protocol, I just ready myself for the entrenched-interest crybabying. But I can't figure out why Amazon is undermining their own brand with this co-mingling scheme! The idea of a trustable supply chain is basically the only thing a retail brand is in this day and age, and Amazon goes and directly undermines their own! I can only surmise the sales on things where it doesn't matter (say fashion) dwarf the return shrapnel for things that it does. Or perhaps that Amazon's internal market-service based approach doesn't account for the externality of arbitraging away their own brand. I think the only things keeping Amazon so prominent are the sunk cost effect of Prime, and most people not really understanding how many other easy-to-use web stores there actually are.
xbkingx 8y ago
Over the past 5 years, Amazon had turned into a veritable minefield and I've come to treat it like I do when ordering from direct-from-China sites, like dx and banggood. Every department has their own unique problems riding on top of the problems that exist across all departments. Since the start of Amazon carrying non-books, I've been perpetually amazed by their absolutely terrible product category breakdowns, lack of category enforcement, and piss poor filtering. They left these problems unchecked so long that they basically screamed "Game me. Nobody's watching." I'm surprised that no one had been sent something dangerous because of these issues. Maybe a concerted community effort to get rat poison listed as the #1 best seller in all the candy categories would be a good wakeup call. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if it happened.
CodeWriter23 8y ago
I was looking on Amazon for a Lightning / 3.5mm splitter so I could simultaneously charge and listen to my iPhone in the car. I found a listing on he first SERP that had 800+ 5-star reviews. No reviews whatsoever in the 1-4 star range. A closer look, all 800 of those reviews were dated within a 3 day period. Obviously fake.
IronWolve 8y ago
I bought 2 big cube ice trays, same brand, 1 was really bad quality, I thought it was most likely a cheap knockoff, never even thought it was fake or counterfeit. Interesting...
walterbell 8y ago
BestBuy will price match Amazon, BH and others, for online and in-store pickup. Can be done in a browser chat session.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ciconia 8y ago
If those who complain about Amazon would put their money where their mouth is, and stop buying from them, I'm pretty sure Amazon would have already done something about it. Regulation, sadly, is not gonna cut it. The only way for this to change is financial pressure.
erik_landerholm 8y ago
You can’t believe anything this site says. They are constantly championing IP trolls. They are completely biased.
- azborder 8y ago
  Interesting because the site has multiple references for its statements and you have none.
gok 8y ago
“Your cost of making genuine products is also my opportunity”
bkraz 8y ago
I've made purchases from Amazon 1-2 times per week for the last few years, and have never once received an item that I suspected as counterfeit. I've ordered everything from food to everyday sundries to pretty esoteric lab equipment. I'm always very surprised by these threads on HN where people say that everything is counterfeit. Cheap, no-name electronics are plentiful, of course. Not everyone can afford to shop at high-end electronics stores that stock only name brands. Sometimes the knockoffs work better than the original. Often times not. Why do people think the sky is falling?
- sgwae 8y ago
  There are lots of knock of bose headphone that sell for 300+ real, but 100 fake. The difference of a bose noise canceling, and generic brand is huge difference. The packaging of fakes is getting really good. Im not taking a risk from Amazon, when best buy has a lower chance of counterfiet inventory. A seller can easily submit many fakes into inventory on amazon. But someone who returns a fake to best buy, but keeping the real device had to risk getting recorded, and can only do so at a slower rate of one item at a time.
reilly3000 8y ago
Smells like an opportunity for anybody that can figure out how to define and filter on "genuine".
untangle 8y ago
> makes it really hard to tell if you're buying something "shipped and sold by Amazon" Not really, the filters on the left are your friend: 1. Check ELIGIBLE FOR PRIME 2. Select Seller=Amazon 3. If in doubt about the rating, run the URL through Fakespot [1]. This is not foolproof but I have found it effective. If I need a broader search I just start relaxing constraints. [1] https://www.fakespot.com/ https://www.fakespot.com/
loco5niner 8y ago
I've found fakespot.com to be helpful (not foolproof) here. I'm starting to also use ReviewMeta.com.... Has anyone had good results from them?

253 points by vezycash 8y ago

Bezos versus Ulbricht (in the past): - both run very successful online store - both never sold counterfeit or illegal products themselves; only offered software (website) to sell products by others - bezos found not guilty for harm and damages from products sold thru his website because he didnt offer it himself - bezos hires 50,000 employees in his own city, giving him God-status jail-free card (which prosecutor or politician wants to see headlines like "Bezos sent to jail, 50000 people unemployed") - ulbricht goes to jail for life without possibility of parole because someone (we don't even know his name) used his website to sell drug that killed a buyer Note to myself: when you grow big and break rules, like Ulbricht or Bezos do, make sure you have thousands of employees working for you, so that you become untouchable! Or face lifetime jail.

mikeyouse 8y ago
Ridiculous comparison aside, Ulbrecht sold a trashbag full of mushrooms on the Silk Road. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/silk-road-trial-fbi-reveals-whats-on-ross-ulbrichts-computer-in-open-court/%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201...
- empath75 8y ago
  He also attempted to hire an assassin.
  - mikeyouse 8y ago
    And kept a diary where he admitted to all of this.
  - afsina 8y ago
    I thought that was debunked already. (If here is credible https://freeross.org https://freeross.org )
    - mikeyouse 8y ago
      Not remotely debunked. He definitely tried to hire multiple hits. He kept a diary of that part too. For his technical chops, he was not a smart guy.
      - afsina 8y ago
        Care to point to credible links? After I dig deeper, seems like he was not really took any sentence on the hit-hiring account. Isn't that absurd?
        mikeyouse 8y ago
        Nah, not really. Two things: 1. Although they didn't charge the attempted hits as separate crimes, they did take them into consideration when they sentenced him. His sentence was longer specifically because the judge believed there was a preponderance of evidence that he hired hitmen and intended to have five people murdered. 2. While under oath, nobody from Ross's side denied that he had hired the hits. They insisted that he was "role-playing" and didn't expect anyone to be killed. Except he paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (visible on the blockchain) to strangers after they sent him 'proof' that the hits were carried out. Proof that included random numbers that Ross provided to ensure the hits were actually carried out. People who say Ross was a good guy are lying or are uninformed. From the sentencing document (Page 17 onward: https://www.scribd.com/doc/283722300/Ross-Ulbricht-Sentencing#from_embed https://www.scribd.com/doc/283722300/Ross-Ulbricht-Sentencin...): > Ulbricht's directed violence here is and relates to the murders for hire which he is alleged to have commissioned and paid for. The Court must determine whether these allegations have been demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence and I find that there is ample and unambiguous evidence that Ulbricht commissioned five murders as part of his efforts to protect his criminal enterprise and that he paid for these murders. There is no evidence that he was role-playing. > The Court finds that the evidence is clear and unambiguous and it far exceeds the necessary preponderance findings, that Ulbricht believed he was paying for murders of those he wanted eliminated, and that he believed they had in fact been murdered. He was told his first victim had a wife and several children. That fact was known to Ulbricht and it is never mentioned by him in connection with his consideration of the murder. The consequences flowing from the murder of a man with his family is never, so far as the Court can tell from the record, considered. > When he commissioned the hit on other of what he thought was one person, Tony76, he learned that Tony76 was apparently someplace -- located someplace with three other individuals. Ulbricht then agreed and paid for a hit on all four of them. There is no evidence in the record that he knew them -- these other three folks -- that he ever dealt with these three folks or had any beef with them at all. He commissioned the hit without regard to who they were, to the fact that they had a right to life. He never asked if they had families, he never expressed any concern for them at all. > The evidence of this murderous intent and the actions specifically taken by Ulbricht to commission the hits is based on trial exhibits including Ulbricht's own journal and his chats with the individuals he hired to oversee the murders and it was not, as I have said, role-playing. > He commissioned the hits, there is no discussion of hypotheticals, he paid actual funds. He paid hundreds of thousands of dollars which were, in fact, paid. He is told when the murders are completed, he was provided with a photo of the murder scene with random numbers that he had provided to the would-be assassins. That there had been no confirmation of any of the deaths does not eliminate the fact that he directed violence and directed the use of violence.
rwmj 8y ago
This is such rubbish. What do you think would happen to senior officers of Amazon if they pivoted the company to selling illegal drugs?
- scarface74 8y ago
  See what happens when big business wants to start selling marijuanna. It's no longer about being "tough on crime", it's about how quickly we can legalize it.
  - XalvinX 8y ago
    In that case I hope Sandoz wants to start selling one of it's famous products again soon...
praneshp 8y ago
Peak HN, and it's not even 9:45 PDT
mschuster91 8y ago
To the downvoters: the comparison isn't without merit imho. The fact that the stuff one could source on SR was in most of all cases pure and free from common dangerous stretching agents (e.g. fentanly-laced cocaine) alone probably saved dozens of lives. If there were no SR, then people would have gotten their drugs from the street instead. Meanwhile Amazon is happily selling Nazi merchandise (which, while legal, is simply disgusting) and stuff like counterfeit car parts, batteries, chargers and other electronics goods that literally can kill people. And, contrary to SR, there is no incentive for either Amazon or the 3rd party sellers to maintain proper business ethics. On SR, you'd deliver a bad charge of drugs and you'd be outta business because people would downvote you. On Amazon literally no one cares and even if you do manage to report stuff to them nothing happens.

brian_herman 8y ago

Can anyone verify this?

benologist 8y ago
Counterfeit stuff on Amazon has been in the news so many times at this point Bezos being unaware would be like Zuckerburg feigning surprise about privacy concerns on Facebook.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

dawhizkid 8y ago

If Amazon ever faces a reckoning or crisis of some kind, it will because their marketplace product is totally out of control. Sellers have completely gamed search, ratings, reviews, everything and Amazon, by design, makes it really hard to tell if you're buying something "shipped and sold by Amazon" vs some other shady seller whose products are only being fulfilled by Amazon. I would say I'm more dissatisfied with things I buy from Amazon than almost any other merchant, and now I only buy things on Amazon if it's 1) either sold directly by Amazon (which is increasingly hard to find) or 2) really cheap and where questionable quality is not a concern. Egregious example: Type in "wireless headphones" and the top results look like what you'd find on a corner in Chinatown than a legitimate electronics store.

p49k 8y ago
Even items “shipped and sold by amazon” can often be counterfeit. Below is one example, but I’ve also read on HN of someone receiving a dangerous fake Apple adapter that was “sold and shipped by Amazon”, and I have personally bought shampoo from Amazon that I’m pretty certain was counterfeit. http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/amazon-is-tricking-consumers-with-its-ships-from-and-sold-by-amazon-label-per-new-suit http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/amazon-is-tricking-consume...
- bapbap 8y ago
  I've wondered if Amazon co-locates its own stock with that of Fulfillment By Amazon stock which would mean you could end up with anything as long as it looks similar and has the same SKU.
  - inapis 8y ago
    This is exactly what happens. Items from different sellers are mixed together and then randomly dispatched by Amazon under their own name.
    - bapbap 8y ago
      Ah, it makes sense to do so but I'd imagine this practice would affect consumer confidence in Sold by Amazon options given time.

vpribish 8y ago

there's not much to that article, it's all weasel-words, insinuation, and qualifiers. Amazon does have an obvious counterfeit problem, and I'd love to read a real account of just what is being done and why it's so ineffective. tl;dr : skip it

jostmey 8y ago

I bought a baby product from amazon. It gave off an immense smell that made me noxious (I don't want to know what my baby was thinking). I threw it away and contacted the company. The company pointed out that the product I had is slightly different from their product and is a counterfeit. It is a huge problem. I don't buy baby products from amazon anymore. Once, amazon shipped me an opened can of any formula

crb002 8y ago

He also makes it really easy for IP owners to track down counterfeit supply chains. Free discovery to sue pirates.

Exuma 8y ago

Time for me to mention https://www.fakespot.com/ https://www.fakespot.com/

coleifer 8y ago

I bought some cologne from them and figured it was safe because the seller was posted as Amazon. Got it and the original barcode had been excised with a razor and replaced with a sticker. Scent and bottle were fake. When I wrote a dispassionate and factual review with pics it was removed with no recourse or explanation. Very sketchy.

sytse 8y ago
They tend to remove the original barcode if they sell at a discount because otherwise the wholesaler/manufacturer will not sell to them again. This is not illegal. If anything it is an indication the product was real.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > They tend to remove the original barcode if they sell at a discount because otherwise the wholesaler/manufacturer will not sell to them again. Why would the wholesaler care?
  - nostromo 8y ago
    Often these are gray market items. If I sell Product X in America for $50 and in China for $5, I would not want retailers selling the Chinese product in America.
- coleifer 8y ago
  This makes no fucking sense. They could have just covered the old barcode with the sticker but someone had taken care to carefully cut it out. As I wrote, the whole reason I got suspicious in the first place is the scent itself was wrong. The bottle, too. I had an old one I'd bought from a department store to compare against.
  - robryan 8y ago
    It needs to be cut out, the point being that the brand can't identify who they originally sold the product to. The brand may take a hard line of their authorized sellers diverting to the grey market. The authorized sellers want to keep being authorized sellers.

21 8y ago

I recently bought Windows 10 Pro license from Amazon for $10 (normal price is $80). It had over 600 ratings, tens of positive reviews along the line "if it doesn't work immediately, phone Microsoft and they will fix it for you". It worked immediately for me. Apparently they are Windows licenses recovered from broken laptops and such, but anyway.

jfoster 8y ago

"Amazon’s official stance, as outlined by these e-mails, counterfeit products will continue to be listed on Amazon’s website in countries where the trademark covering the brand isn’t registered." So they try to do what the law requires them to. The flaw in this approach is that consumers could end up with fake stuff in countries where trademarks aren't registered. Whilst that might be within the law, it's still a shitty experience for consumers.

unreal37 8y ago
You're assuming customers care about the manufacturer of the product at all. For batteries, cables, earbuds, paper, dog toys, etc etc etc - the customer does not care who the manufacturer is as long as the item is good quality.
- azernik 8y ago
  And there's the rub: as long as the item is good quality. The main reason for trademarks, economically speaking, is to increase information flow in the marketplace. If some seller claims they have good quality products, you have to just trust them; if they have a trademark and you know that they have a reputation for quality, that trust can be much more accurate. Where Amazon messes this up is in the intermingling of reviews and inventory for genuine and counterfeit trademarked products, so that customers can't tell whether they're getting Apple-quality or random-Chinese-manufacturer quality chargers, which will either be super-safe or will blow up their devices. I'm totally okay with buying a battery from a third party, as long as the real manufacturer is clearly indicated and I can check up on the reviews of their build quality.
- smittywerben 8y ago
  I'd prefer non-counterfit batteries. If one explodes, who is liable?
- loco5niner 8y ago
  Actually, I've found that the best way to guarantee I'm buying a quality product is to shop by brand. I assume that is highly but not completely correlated with manufacturer.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

skort 8y ago

It seems like the only metric Amazon is optimizing for is number of items sold, and this seems to be the natural progression of a system where that is the primary goal. Making a change that decreases the sale of counterfeit products is a change that reduces the sale of products, and in Amazon's case, also leased warehouse space (FBA), and who knows what else - all of which are likely negative metrics. It's telling, that in the update to the Elevation Lab blog post, it's noted that Amazon doesn't allow 3rd party sellers to sell Amazon Basics products. https://www.elevationlab.com/blogs/news/amazon-is-complicit-with-counterfeit-sellers# https://www.elevationlab.com/blogs/news/amazon-is-complicit-...

XalvinX 8y ago

Well, you know what he will say...the same thing everyone says. The same thing Google says about the rampant copyright theft their platform allows. The same thing Facebook says about bullying, fake news, and the like. The same thing Napster and PirateBay say about their services. The same thing Photoshop would say about people counterfeiting stuff using that. The same thing Bitcoin people (or for that matter, the Federal Reserve system) say about people using their coins for illegal purchases. The same thing the National Park Service says about people falling off of cliffs. These are all just platforms, and cannot reasonably be held responsible for the action of all their users all of the time. And I think any reasonable-minded person, and most judges, have to see it that way too. This "complicit" is a misuse of the English language, I think. Bezos is not in cahoots with the counterfeiters here. That is nonsense. People have been accultured to expect some kind of protection everywhere, all the time. Well, guess what? It's a big world and there are a lot of scammers out there, and nobody can protect you all the time. You have to learn how to protect yourself. Amazon's review system is one way to protect yourself. I think it isn't bad at all. Read what other people have to say about a product and the vendor before giving up your credit card info.

rubicon33 8y ago
Really the question is are they doing enough to stop it? The National Park Service, at least, put up guide wires and a warning sign on dangerous trails.
- XalvinX 8y ago
  Umm...not true. There is no rail on the edge of Half Dome..you can literally hang your feet off the edge, as I have done....and it was pretty cool.
  - lisper 8y ago
    At least on Half Dome it is hard to miss the fact that you are approaching the edge, and that this entails risk. Amazon is deliberately obscuring the risks by making it appear that products are vetted and/or endorsed, either by them or by customers, when in fact they are not. Even the review system, which you praised in your OP, is easily gamed.

adamio 8y ago

Manufacturers selling on Amazon should include QR coded key that can be verified as authentic

archgoon 8y ago
Sounds like the start of a good idea; but a few implementation issues. 1) Steal one QR code, it can then be duplicated. 2) Works well for the situation where Amazon is not simply connecting you directly to the seller, but not when the seller ships directly to you. (2) could be potentially modified to have brands insist that amazon themselves act as the final shipper (so it would be sent to their warehouses and verified). (1) is tough one to crack. A transaction ledger would prevent the duplication problem; but may have scaling issues since you'd potentially need to verify the physical objects on receipt. It also doesn't deal with the situation where the product itself can be decomposed for parts and sold separately (like some electronics). Then the QR code can be used to sell an inferior replacement product (an empty box). Though the QR code + transaction ledger is probably a necessary first step to dealing with this issue.
- colejohnson66 8y ago
  > A transaction ledger... Did I hear AmazonCoin? /s
  - archgoon 8y ago
    No, why? Why would Amazon issue a coin system? That is only needed when you need to incentivize people to perform computation on your behalf.

lph 8y ago

I really, really want to hear the other side to this. That there is a serious counterfeiting problem is obvious to anyone who buys certain categories of products on Amazon. It is certainly obvious to Amazon itself. BUT Amazon is also a very customer focused company. So how has this not been solved? Critics will speculate that Amazon makes more money with this status quo, thus has little incentive to fix things. But that calculus doesn't make any sense---maybe in a very narrow balance sheet view, but Amazon has always taken a long view on these things, and there's no way the long term damage to their brand is worth whatever they make from sketchy third-party sellers. It doesn't add up. There must be something else factored in that I'm missing.

cimmanom 8y ago
I'm skeptical of your claim that Amazon is a customer-focused company. They're definitely a growth-focused company. At times in their history, and for certain aspects of the business, that has made them customer-focused. In many other regards (like making sure the customer gets the product they want) they're clearly not at all customer-focused. They won't address this until it begins to visibly impact their marketplace dominance.
- CodeWriter23 8y ago
  Amazon’s slogan is “The most customer-centric company on Earth”. It seems like customer care should be a top priority. But it’s not. Especially for customers who pay Amazon for marketing and logistical services.
  - csytan 8y ago
    Sellers are customers too, but I think that in this context it means the people who make purchases on Amazon.
- lph 8y ago
  Amazon's customer service is legendary. It's why this whole thing is such a mystery. If Comcast were doing something so bad for customers, nobody would be surprised.

kylecordes 8y ago

I've been an Amazon customer since 1998, and this problem has shifted my buying away from Amazon, for categories where counterfeiting seems likely. If they offered an option to simply never see any items with that (idiotic) co-mingled counterfeit-prone inventory management scheme, I'd happily pay a bit more to get things which I am confident went directly from the real manufacture, to Amazon, to me. Which of course is exactly what I do... by not shopping for such items at Amazon. Truly the whole thing makes me wonder what kind of thinking could be going on. They have an amazing juggernaut of success going, all they have to do is not screw it up by doing anything especially stupid. Like this.

dahdum 8y ago
I used to do virtually all my buying on Amazon, their supply chain mess has moved me to about half. I honestly never thought I’d step foot in a Best Buy or Frys again, but for branded merchandise it’s far safer to do so.
- walterbell 8y ago
  Have done the same. Price match and same day in-store pickup is faster than Amazon at the same price.

carapace 8y ago

Buries the lede. If you click through to the press release https://thecounterfeitreport.com/press_release_details.php?date=2018-06-05&id=762 https://thecounterfeitreport.com/press_release_details.php?d... > In repeated emails from Amazon opening with "Jeff Bezos received your email and I am responding on his behalf," The Counterfeit Report, a consumer advocate and industry watchdog, has been informed that inarguable counterfeit items will not be removed from many of Amazon's various 13 global websites. Amazon uses a crafty excuse: "Trademarks must be validly registered for European countries to take action on European nations" or "Your trademark must be in registered status in [each country the item is sold in]." So they will actually let known counterfeits be sold freely in countries where the brand isn't trademarked. Further, and worse IMHO, is this: > For example, the counterfeit items below were repeatedly purchased from the same Amazon sellers and shipped to the USA. > ... Replica current issue U.S. Secret Service, FBI and police badges are available on Amazon... > Notices to Amazon management for of [sic] the alarming practice have been ignored. The items remain.

cornholio 8y ago

> There is something extremely simple Amazon could do about [counterfeit products]. If you have a registered brand in the Brand Registry and don’t sell the product wholesale – there could be one box to check for that. And anyone else would have to get approval or high vetting to sell the product, especially if they are sending large quantities to FBA. I imagine there are some algorithmic solutions that could catch most of it too… Why Amazon doesn’t do this is mind-blowing Because producers would immediately check any box that needs to be checked in order to become the single supplier of their brand on Amazon. It's immensely valuable to control all sales on the largest online store in the world, while at the same time maintaining a discriminatory pricing structure on various markets without being undercut online by your own distributors. Amazon would effectively let brand owners gouge their customers and reduce Amazon overall competitivity and appeal.

vernie 8y ago

Amazon's commingling of items from different sellers is simply insane.

mindslight 8y ago

I generally support grey markets - including works-well-enough brand-imitating goods, and free trade that undermines unjust cartel/vice laws. Like when it clicks that the domain ipwatchdog.com isn't about the Internet Protocol, I just ready myself for the entrenched-interest crybabying. But I can't figure out why Amazon is undermining their own brand with this co-mingling scheme! The idea of a trustable supply chain is basically the only thing a retail brand is in this day and age, and Amazon goes and directly undermines their own! I can only surmise the sales on things where it doesn't matter (say fashion) dwarf the return shrapnel for things that it does. Or perhaps that Amazon's internal market-service based approach doesn't account for the externality of arbitraging away their own brand. I think the only things keeping Amazon so prominent are the sunk cost effect of Prime, and most people not really understanding how many other easy-to-use web stores there actually are.

xbkingx 8y ago

Over the past 5 years, Amazon had turned into a veritable minefield and I've come to treat it like I do when ordering from direct-from-China sites, like dx and banggood. Every department has their own unique problems riding on top of the problems that exist across all departments. Since the start of Amazon carrying non-books, I've been perpetually amazed by their absolutely terrible product category breakdowns, lack of category enforcement, and piss poor filtering. They left these problems unchecked so long that they basically screamed "Game me. Nobody's watching." I'm surprised that no one had been sent something dangerous because of these issues. Maybe a concerted community effort to get rat poison listed as the #1 best seller in all the candy categories would be a good wakeup call. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if it happened.

CodeWriter23 8y ago

I was looking on Amazon for a Lightning / 3.5mm splitter so I could simultaneously charge and listen to my iPhone in the car. I found a listing on he first SERP that had 800+ 5-star reviews. No reviews whatsoever in the 1-4 star range. A closer look, all 800 of those reviews were dated within a 3 day period. Obviously fake.

IronWolve 8y ago

I bought 2 big cube ice trays, same brand, 1 was really bad quality, I thought it was most likely a cheap knockoff, never even thought it was fake or counterfeit. Interesting...

walterbell 8y ago

BestBuy will price match Amazon, BH and others, for online and in-store pickup. Can be done in a browser chat session.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ciconia 8y ago

If those who complain about Amazon would put their money where their mouth is, and stop buying from them, I'm pretty sure Amazon would have already done something about it. Regulation, sadly, is not gonna cut it. The only way for this to change is financial pressure.

erik_landerholm 8y ago

You can’t believe anything this site says. They are constantly championing IP trolls. They are completely biased.

azborder 8y ago
Interesting because the site has multiple references for its statements and you have none.

gok 8y ago

“Your cost of making genuine products is also my opportunity”

bkraz 8y ago

I've made purchases from Amazon 1-2 times per week for the last few years, and have never once received an item that I suspected as counterfeit. I've ordered everything from food to everyday sundries to pretty esoteric lab equipment. I'm always very surprised by these threads on HN where people say that everything is counterfeit. Cheap, no-name electronics are plentiful, of course. Not everyone can afford to shop at high-end electronics stores that stock only name brands. Sometimes the knockoffs work better than the original. Often times not. Why do people think the sky is falling?

sgwae 8y ago
There are lots of knock of bose headphone that sell for 300+ real, but 100 fake. The difference of a bose noise canceling, and generic brand is huge difference. The packaging of fakes is getting really good. Im not taking a risk from Amazon, when best buy has a lower chance of counterfiet inventory. A seller can easily submit many fakes into inventory on amazon. But someone who returns a fake to best buy, but keeping the real device had to risk getting recorded, and can only do so at a slower rate of one item at a time.

reilly3000 8y ago

Smells like an opportunity for anybody that can figure out how to define and filter on "genuine".

untangle 8y ago

> makes it really hard to tell if you're buying something "shipped and sold by Amazon" Not really, the filters on the left are your friend: 1. Check ELIGIBLE FOR PRIME 2. Select Seller=Amazon 3. If in doubt about the rating, run the URL through Fakespot [1]. This is not foolproof but I have found it effective. If I need a broader search I just start relaxing constraints. [1] https://www.fakespot.com/ https://www.fakespot.com/

loco5niner 8y ago

I've found fakespot.com to be helpful (not foolproof) here. I'm starting to also use ReviewMeta.com.... Has anyone had good results from them?