4 ms·

I think that this article means the opposite... and that Amazon could be liable for stuff that you buy from random Chinese dudes. So it should become less risk

by OrgNet 7y ago

I think that this article means the opposite... and that Amazon could be liable for stuff that you buy from random Chinese dudes. So it should become less risky.

sidlls 7y ago
The GP means (I think) that this decision effectively forces Amazon to make a decision: either stop permitting third-party sellers or else require third-party sellers to identify themselves (and, implicitly, provide bona fide contact information). The result of the second option is that many third-party sellers on Amazon will be exposed as Chinese sellers who in practice cannot be held accountable. In both cases, Amazon loses business.
- pfisch 7y ago
  Amazon will just play games where you have to dig through a bunch of menus to figure it out.
  - paxys 7y ago
    They already do this today, and clearly the judge isn't letting it slide.
- crazygringo 7y ago
  GP here: And not just contact information, but a legitimate US legal and financial presence. If you're selling in the US, I need to be able to effectively sue you and win in the US if you sell harmful or illegal products, full stop. So you should have to put up some kind of financial bond and a law firm to represent you. Because mom and pop businesses can't do this themselves, this should be provided as a kind of insurance policy that's just part of the cost of doing business. Heck, Amazon can be that insurance policy if they want. But right -- if I can't sue you, you should under no circumstances be allowed to sell within the US on a US platform.
  - sidlls 7y ago
    My wife runs a small side-business and has a Seller account on Amazon. I'm a little nervous for what this might mean (assuming they don't appeal and actually do something about it) in the short term in terms of compliance costs, etc., but in the long run I think it's for the best. There is a real problem with inferior quality products and intellectual property/copyright theft from non-American sellers and aside from that the points you note are valid too: people who buy from sellers using Amazon's platform ought to have recourse--and either Amazon or the seller has to provide it when required.
    - jacques_chester 7y ago
      You ought to talk to a lawyer about your best options. It may be something like an LLC.
  - uiri 7y ago
    Any US legal entity (corporation, LLC, etc.) formed in one of the 50 states is required to have a registered agent in its state of formation. The primary purpose of said registered agent is to receive legal process on behalf of the US legal entity. So any US corporation or LLC should meet the "US legal and financial presence" requirement that you describe.

by OrgNet 7y ago

I think that this article means the opposite... and that Amazon could be liable for stuff that you buy from random Chinese dudes. So it should become less risky.

sidlls 7y ago

The GP means (I think) that this decision effectively forces Amazon to make a decision: either stop permitting third-party sellers or else require third-party sellers to identify themselves (and, implicitly, provide bona fide contact information). The result of the second option is that many third-party sellers on Amazon will be exposed as Chinese sellers who in practice cannot be held accountable. In both cases, Amazon loses business.

pfisch 7y ago
Amazon will just play games where you have to dig through a bunch of menus to figure it out.
- paxys 7y ago
  They already do this today, and clearly the judge isn't letting it slide.
crazygringo 7y ago
GP here: And not just contact information, but a legitimate US legal and financial presence. If you're selling in the US, I need to be able to effectively sue you and win in the US if you sell harmful or illegal products, full stop. So you should have to put up some kind of financial bond and a law firm to represent you. Because mom and pop businesses can't do this themselves, this should be provided as a kind of insurance policy that's just part of the cost of doing business. Heck, Amazon can be that insurance policy if they want. But right -- if I can't sue you, you should under no circumstances be allowed to sell within the US on a US platform.
- sidlls 7y ago
  My wife runs a small side-business and has a Seller account on Amazon. I'm a little nervous for what this might mean (assuming they don't appeal and actually do something about it) in the short term in terms of compliance costs, etc., but in the long run I think it's for the best. There is a real problem with inferior quality products and intellectual property/copyright theft from non-American sellers and aside from that the points you note are valid too: people who buy from sellers using Amazon's platform ought to have recourse--and either Amazon or the seller has to provide it when required.
  - jacques_chester 7y ago
    You ought to talk to a lawyer about your best options. It may be something like an LLC.
- uiri 7y ago
  Any US legal entity (corporation, LLC, etc.) formed in one of the 50 states is required to have a registered agent in its state of formation. The primary purpose of said registered agent is to receive legal process on behalf of the US legal entity. So any US corporation or LLC should meet the "US legal and financial presence" requirement that you describe.