3 ms·

Every open marketplace is always going to list counterfeit goods as a business risk, because it is. That's not the same thing as implying that their reputation

Every open marketplace is always going to list counterfeit goods as a business risk, because it is. That's not the same thing as implying that their reputation is damaged. On the contrary, Amazon's horrible reputation for counterfeit goods seems to exist here and on reddit and that's pretty much it.

cheeze 8y ago
Yup. This is my point. Granted, I'm mainly speaking from anecdotes myself here, but the only place I ever hear about how terrible Amazon is because of counterfeits is here or reddit (rarely reddit.) I live in Seattle so I hear a lot of criticism of Amazon, but this isn't one that surfaces often.
bduerst 8y ago
What's the burden of proof for 'their reputation is damaged' here? A fully sponsored brand survey? A number of companies from Lush Soaps to Birkenstock are suing Amazon for infringement, the AAFA is requesting the US Trade Representative office to add Amazon markets to their list of known counterfeiters, and Amazon is finally acknowledging to investors they have a problem - but if you're just going to dismiss this as "business as usual" then it's not worth the discussion.
- jhall1468 8y ago
  > Lush Soaps to Birkenstock are suing Amazon The Lush lawsuit was from 2014 and had absolutely nothing to do with counterfeit items, it was about allowing advertisers to use the Lush keyword in search listings for ads. Birkenstock is a good example of a case they will almost certainly lose. Courts have routinely ruled that marketplaces can't be held responsible for counterfeits that they don't control. > the AAFA is requesting the US Trade Representative office to add Amazon markets to their list of known counterfeiters That's a joke and should be treated as such. It's never going anywhere and is purely a PR campaign to get Amazon to more proactively work against counterfeit products. That's a fair goal, but hardly impacting Amazon's reputation among consumers. > and Amazon is finally acknowledging to investors they have a problem They've done so in their 10k in the past as well. > but if you're just going to dismiss this as "business as usual" then it's not worth the discussion. If the entirety of your evidence is silly requests and a mixture of lawsuits that either won't work (because they never have) or are entirely unrelated to the conversation, then yeah I'd say there's near-zero reputation damage. That said, Project Zero indicates that Amazon is paying attention so they absolutely see some risk. But nothing you've presented suggests that Amazon's reputation as far as consumers are concerned has been impacted as of yet. Their annual sales growth seems to confirm that.
  - groby_b 8y ago
    IIRC, Birkenstock has evidence Amazon used the counterfeiters to force them to bring all (even new/brick & mortar only) Birkenstocks to Amazon. "Yes, we can solve your counterfeit problem, if you stop having special editions outside of Amazon". Which puts the "they can't control" part in doubt :)
    - jhall1468 8y ago
      First of all there's no "evidence" of anything, it's a claim Birkenstock is making. And the actual claim (by the CEO of Birkenstock) had nothing to do with counterfeiters, it was that Amazon was attempting to attract legitimate retailers that sell Birkenstocks to sell them on Amazon. Then the Birkenstock CEO threatened to sue Amazon for doing so, saying that Amazon was knowingly violating their policy, despite the fact that you can't win lawsuit for a company that you have no legal agreement with, so that threat is empty BS.
throwawaymath 8y ago
> Every open marketplace is always going to list counterfeit goods as a business risk, because it is. On the contrary, Amazon did not list counterfeit goods as a business risk in its 10-K filings prior to 2019.[1] It has been an open marketplace since before 2019. That does seem to imply they only started taking it seriously as a business risk somewhat recently, which could be interpreted as hedging against reputation damage. Otherwise I'm in agreement that there's outsized discussion of the problem on reddit and HN. _________________________ 1. https://ir.aboutamazon.com/sec-filings?field_nir_sec_form_group_target_id%5B%5D=471&field_nir_sec_date_filed_value=2018&items_per_page=10 https://ir.aboutamazon.com/sec-filings?field_nir_sec_form_gr...
- kop316 8y ago
  To provide a correlary, I am sure Boeing didn't mention software and MACS as a risk until a month ago. Why would Amazon even acknowledge counterfeits to be an issue until it actually effects business?

cheeze 8y ago

Yup. This is my point. Granted, I'm mainly speaking from anecdotes myself here, but the only place I ever hear about how terrible Amazon is because of counterfeits is here or reddit (rarely reddit.) I live in Seattle so I hear a lot of criticism of Amazon, but this isn't one that surfaces often.

bduerst 8y ago

What's the burden of proof for 'their reputation is damaged' here? A fully sponsored brand survey? A number of companies from Lush Soaps to Birkenstock are suing Amazon for infringement, the AAFA is requesting the US Trade Representative office to add Amazon markets to their list of known counterfeiters, and Amazon is finally acknowledging to investors they have a problem - but if you're just going to dismiss this as "business as usual" then it's not worth the discussion.

jhall1468 8y ago
> Lush Soaps to Birkenstock are suing Amazon The Lush lawsuit was from 2014 and had absolutely nothing to do with counterfeit items, it was about allowing advertisers to use the Lush keyword in search listings for ads. Birkenstock is a good example of a case they will almost certainly lose. Courts have routinely ruled that marketplaces can't be held responsible for counterfeits that they don't control. > the AAFA is requesting the US Trade Representative office to add Amazon markets to their list of known counterfeiters That's a joke and should be treated as such. It's never going anywhere and is purely a PR campaign to get Amazon to more proactively work against counterfeit products. That's a fair goal, but hardly impacting Amazon's reputation among consumers. > and Amazon is finally acknowledging to investors they have a problem They've done so in their 10k in the past as well. > but if you're just going to dismiss this as "business as usual" then it's not worth the discussion. If the entirety of your evidence is silly requests and a mixture of lawsuits that either won't work (because they never have) or are entirely unrelated to the conversation, then yeah I'd say there's near-zero reputation damage. That said, Project Zero indicates that Amazon is paying attention so they absolutely see some risk. But nothing you've presented suggests that Amazon's reputation as far as consumers are concerned has been impacted as of yet. Their annual sales growth seems to confirm that.
- groby_b 8y ago
  IIRC, Birkenstock has evidence Amazon used the counterfeiters to force them to bring all (even new/brick & mortar only) Birkenstocks to Amazon. "Yes, we can solve your counterfeit problem, if you stop having special editions outside of Amazon". Which puts the "they can't control" part in doubt :)
  - jhall1468 8y ago
    First of all there's no "evidence" of anything, it's a claim Birkenstock is making. And the actual claim (by the CEO of Birkenstock) had nothing to do with counterfeiters, it was that Amazon was attempting to attract legitimate retailers that sell Birkenstocks to sell them on Amazon. Then the Birkenstock CEO threatened to sue Amazon for doing so, saying that Amazon was knowingly violating their policy, despite the fact that you can't win lawsuit for a company that you have no legal agreement with, so that threat is empty BS.

throwawaymath 8y ago

> Every open marketplace is always going to list counterfeit goods as a business risk, because it is. On the contrary, Amazon did not list counterfeit goods as a business risk in its 10-K filings prior to 2019.[1] It has been an open marketplace since before 2019. That does seem to imply they only started taking it seriously as a business risk somewhat recently, which could be interpreted as hedging against reputation damage. Otherwise I'm in agreement that there's outsized discussion of the problem on reddit and HN. _________________________ 1. https://ir.aboutamazon.com/sec-filings?field_nir_sec_form_group_target_id%5B%5D=471&field_nir_sec_date_filed_value=2018&items_per_page=10 https://ir.aboutamazon.com/sec-filings?field_nir_sec_form_gr...

kop316 8y ago
To provide a correlary, I am sure Boeing didn't mention software and MACS as a risk until a month ago. Why would Amazon even acknowledge counterfeits to be an issue until it actually effects business?