4 ms·

Will happen to Amazon what has happened to the other big techs assuming U.S. laws / principles could just be applied world-wide without taking local laws / prin

Will happen to Amazon what has happened to the other big techs assuming U.S. laws / principles could just be applied world-wide without taking local laws / principles into account. Amazon is getting under the scrutiny it deserves, and it will lose some of its current competitive advantages by being forced, fairly or not, to (over) comply with local requirements. Easiest card to play for countries trying to defend their historic, local players 'who pay their taxes in [insert country] and comply with its laws'.

hoistbypetard 7y ago
>Amazon is getting under the scrutiny it deserves, and it will lose some of its current competitive advantages by being forced, fairly or not, to (over) comply with local requirements. Forcing them to comply with warranty/consumer protection laws in a jurisdiction feels very fair when they're selling their own private label brands to customers in that jurisdiction.
- clement_b 7y ago
  Completely agree. What you describe, is fair. There is a law. They must comply. What I had in mind is that countries will come up with unfair actions against Amazon. By unfair I mean that with regards to the actual action, not the general situation or the end outcome. For instance, Airbnb or Uber, who are disrupting markets by flirting with legality in many cities, are often targeted by regulations aimed at them, specifically. These regulations are not always fair since their purpose is to reset, if not invert, a situation to help struggling local players. The end goal is to have a fair market, but when fairness is about defending local, less competitive players at all cost then the regulation is unfair. Maybe the word 'fair' is not exactly the right one. 'appropriate' might be better.
rsynnott 7y ago
Requiring companies to obey the law? How rude. No-one is actually forcing them to sell this stuff, you know. If they want to sell it, they’ll have to follow the rules.
- clement_b 7y ago
  It feels that whenever it can, Amazon will hide behind its lack of control over its 3rd party vendors when something fishy is happening. To my knowledge selling counterfeit goods in the U.S. is illegal, yet this is a widespread issue on Amazon U.S. So. Complying, OK but only when last resort!
olliej 7y ago
NZ law doesn’t require return to manufacturer, it requires the seller to accept the return. NZ law also makes minimum warranty requirements so brand new goods can’t be sold “without warranty”. Amazon tries to claim that it’s a “market place” and doesn’t actually sell things itself, but all that matters in NZ is who you have given your payment info to.
- tapland 7y ago
  Same in Sweden. Seller is responsible and the warranty period is automatically three years.
spookthesunset 7y ago
If it doesn’t have a warranty and that it is an issue... don’t buy it. This is clickbait for all the local “amazon sucks” folks who will retell that one time they ordered counterfeit toilet paper or the one time the amazon delivery driver threw their package over the fence and now all of amazon sucks and so does the rest of modern retail and we should go back to trading sticks and stones for our lofi dumbphones...

hoistbypetard 7y ago

>Amazon is getting under the scrutiny it deserves, and it will lose some of its current competitive advantages by being forced, fairly or not, to (over) comply with local requirements. Forcing them to comply with warranty/consumer protection laws in a jurisdiction feels very fair when they're selling their own private label brands to customers in that jurisdiction.

clement_b 7y ago
Completely agree. What you describe, is fair. There is a law. They must comply. What I had in mind is that countries will come up with unfair actions against Amazon. By unfair I mean that with regards to the actual action, not the general situation or the end outcome. For instance, Airbnb or Uber, who are disrupting markets by flirting with legality in many cities, are often targeted by regulations aimed at them, specifically. These regulations are not always fair since their purpose is to reset, if not invert, a situation to help struggling local players. The end goal is to have a fair market, but when fairness is about defending local, less competitive players at all cost then the regulation is unfair. Maybe the word 'fair' is not exactly the right one. 'appropriate' might be better.

rsynnott 7y ago

Requiring companies to obey the law? How rude. No-one is actually forcing them to sell this stuff, you know. If they want to sell it, they’ll have to follow the rules.

clement_b 7y ago
It feels that whenever it can, Amazon will hide behind its lack of control over its 3rd party vendors when something fishy is happening. To my knowledge selling counterfeit goods in the U.S. is illegal, yet this is a widespread issue on Amazon U.S. So. Complying, OK but only when last resort!

olliej 7y ago

NZ law doesn’t require return to manufacturer, it requires the seller to accept the return. NZ law also makes minimum warranty requirements so brand new goods can’t be sold “without warranty”. Amazon tries to claim that it’s a “market place” and doesn’t actually sell things itself, but all that matters in NZ is who you have given your payment info to.

tapland 7y ago
Same in Sweden. Seller is responsible and the warranty period is automatically three years.

spookthesunset 7y ago

If it doesn’t have a warranty and that it is an issue... don’t buy it. This is clickbait for all the local “amazon sucks” folks who will retell that one time they ordered counterfeit toilet paper or the one time the amazon delivery driver threw their package over the fence and now all of amazon sucks and so does the rest of modern retail and we should go back to trading sticks and stones for our lofi dumbphones...