4 ms·

Agreed. If that's the case, then this is completely fair. If Amazon wants to conceal information about the seller, then they have to deal with the things that

Agreed. If that's the case, then this is completely fair. If Amazon wants to conceal information about the seller, then they have to deal with the things that the seller would usually deal with.

floatingatoll 7y ago
Amazon could end up being required to declare the seller’s information to the buyer (at time of purchase!), and required to validate that information using expensive non-trivial practices such as business license lookups and tax form SSN/EIN checks. This court decision implies that liability defaults to Amazon under their current practices, and shifting that liability would need to involve disclosure prior to sale. These are all absolutely market-destroying things - and when you apply them to eBay, which does not provide seller contact information or perform tax validation before the sale occurs, it only worsens in potential impact for businesses profiting off of their enforcement-free approach today.
- duncan-donuts 7y ago
  Sounds like a good thing to protect consumers. Would this be problematic for most people?
- jammygit 7y ago
  I was researching creating a 2 sided marketplace for selling certain electronics this week. This is a bad omen maybe
  - floatingatoll 7y ago
    "I'm going to compete with eBay in a market visibly riddled with fraud and malicious actors" is probably a bad omen regardless of the third-party problem. But. If you arrange the transaction between the two sellers and hold payment+device in escrow, then that's clearly "arranged between two sellers" and wouldn't be the target of this ruling. (Escrow insurance isn't cheap, though. And without escrow, you have nothing but risk.)
    - jbottoms 7y ago
      The use of an approach based on Letters of Credit entail clasuses that compel arbitration. That means there must be "Principled Documents" available that will support a court case in the event the arbitration process fails. Further, it is now seen that there are weaknesses in arbitration jurisprudence that allow either party to reneg on payments to the arbitrator; in which case the judge must dismiss the case. (Harvard Negotiation Law Review). It is not clear if the arbitration process will be modified (read: repaired). In effect, Amazon is asking to ignore precedent jurisprudence.
- harimau777 7y ago
  It seems to me that the difference with Ebay is that I am buying from a specific person (even if that person is effectively a stranger to me). On the other hand with Amazon I'm presented with a product that happens to be sold by many different people.
  - floatingatoll 7y ago
    Indeed, I think that’s a critical difference that has likely protected eBay from this concern - and is an area where Amazon thought it could differentiate itself without risk of liability. The risk to eBay is that Amazon’s push on that front of deniability creates a backlash that imposes new constraints of disclosure and/or verification on eBay.
    - cannonedhamster 7y ago
      eBay is a flea market. It's what that sell themselves as. You are knowingly purchasing used items and there's almost always a picture of the exact item you're getting and where it's being shipped from. Amazon by comparison is a black box of magic, only the magic smoke is toxic and you have no idea who to go to for redress. Amazon has gotten a free ride for years, screwingb both their sellers and buyers, making knock off products when it sees profit motive, it's time to pay the Piper.
  - maccard 7y ago
    I've bought and sold a moderate amount on eBay - as a buyer I am protected for the most part. Every dispute I've filed as a buyer I've won, and every dispute I've had filed against me as a seller (2, in 10 years) I've lost. One was my fault (I made a mistake with the description) and the other was someone claiming I shipped the wrong item, (which I didn't, they just got a free game out of it). The weighting is heavily in favour of the buyer on eBay, and even after being scammed once I still think it's the right thing to do. On the flip side for Amazon,it feels unfair that the seller has my contact details and can use it to send me emails asking for reviews and to market their other products even when I've opted out of marketing emails. I've had a few counterfeit products where the seller just hasn't responded and I've been refunded but left with the counterfeit item, which doesn't sit well with me. The comingling is an awful problem, and if there were another site that offered next day delivery on a variety of goods with guaranteed wualotythat was more expensive, id swap in a heartbeat.

Agreed. If that's the case, then this is completely fair. If Amazon wants to conceal information about the seller, then they have to deal with the things that the seller would usually deal with.

floatingatoll 7y ago

Amazon could end up being required to declare the seller’s information to the buyer (at time of purchase!), and required to validate that information using expensive non-trivial practices such as business license lookups and tax form SSN/EIN checks. This court decision implies that liability defaults to Amazon under their current practices, and shifting that liability would need to involve disclosure prior to sale. These are all absolutely market-destroying things - and when you apply them to eBay, which does not provide seller contact information or perform tax validation before the sale occurs, it only worsens in potential impact for businesses profiting off of their enforcement-free approach today.

duncan-donuts 7y ago
Sounds like a good thing to protect consumers. Would this be problematic for most people?
jammygit 7y ago
I was researching creating a 2 sided marketplace for selling certain electronics this week. This is a bad omen maybe
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  "I'm going to compete with eBay in a market visibly riddled with fraud and malicious actors" is probably a bad omen regardless of the third-party problem. But. If you arrange the transaction between the two sellers and hold payment+device in escrow, then that's clearly "arranged between two sellers" and wouldn't be the target of this ruling. (Escrow insurance isn't cheap, though. And without escrow, you have nothing but risk.)
  - jbottoms 7y ago
    The use of an approach based on Letters of Credit entail clasuses that compel arbitration. That means there must be "Principled Documents" available that will support a court case in the event the arbitration process fails. Further, it is now seen that there are weaknesses in arbitration jurisprudence that allow either party to reneg on payments to the arbitrator; in which case the judge must dismiss the case. (Harvard Negotiation Law Review). It is not clear if the arbitration process will be modified (read: repaired). In effect, Amazon is asking to ignore precedent jurisprudence.
harimau777 7y ago
It seems to me that the difference with Ebay is that I am buying from a specific person (even if that person is effectively a stranger to me). On the other hand with Amazon I'm presented with a product that happens to be sold by many different people.
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  Indeed, I think that’s a critical difference that has likely protected eBay from this concern - and is an area where Amazon thought it could differentiate itself without risk of liability. The risk to eBay is that Amazon’s push on that front of deniability creates a backlash that imposes new constraints of disclosure and/or verification on eBay.
  - cannonedhamster 7y ago
    eBay is a flea market. It's what that sell themselves as. You are knowingly purchasing used items and there's almost always a picture of the exact item you're getting and where it's being shipped from. Amazon by comparison is a black box of magic, only the magic smoke is toxic and you have no idea who to go to for redress. Amazon has gotten a free ride for years, screwingb both their sellers and buyers, making knock off products when it sees profit motive, it's time to pay the Piper.
- maccard 7y ago
  I've bought and sold a moderate amount on eBay - as a buyer I am protected for the most part. Every dispute I've filed as a buyer I've won, and every dispute I've had filed against me as a seller (2, in 10 years) I've lost. One was my fault (I made a mistake with the description) and the other was someone claiming I shipped the wrong item, (which I didn't, they just got a free game out of it). The weighting is heavily in favour of the buyer on eBay, and even after being scammed once I still think it's the right thing to do. On the flip side for Amazon,it feels unfair that the seller has my contact details and can use it to send me emails asking for reviews and to market their other products even when I've opted out of marketing emails. I've had a few counterfeit products where the seller just hasn't responded and I've been refunded but left with the counterfeit item, which doesn't sit well with me. The comingling is an awful problem, and if there were another site that offered next day delivery on a variety of goods with guaranteed wualotythat was more expensive, id swap in a heartbeat.