4 ms·
I’m assuming they’ve done some sort of calculus. If you were cynical, you could say they’re pushing the bounds because they know they’ll get whacked for somet
by boardwaalk 6y ago
I’m assuming they’ve done some sort of calculus.
If you were cynical, you could say they’re pushing the bounds because they know they’ll get whacked for something eventually, even if just for owning a huge chunk of e-commerce (already the case). And if they are going to, why don’t they choose what that’ll be, and the thing that makes them hardly any money? I’m sure they’d be happy to pay basically nothing (what, use their lawyers already on retainer and wind-down contracting of white-label crap? — and maybe pay damages, which seems unlikely they’d let it go that far).
- macspoofing 6y agoYou must be correct. They are a trillion-dollar company and they can certainly afford lobbyists and lawyers and accountants and consultants to tell them where the regulatory limits are. And yet, I cannot see how regulators will just let them take over consumer goods given their size and clout, and the fact that they are using data from their users to drive their business decisions on which products to launch and compete with those same users. I just cannot see them not getting into major regulatory trouble for that.
- lenkite 6y agoThe EU competition law fine is capped at 10% of annual turnover of company. So I guess Amazon can hypothetically stand to loose 17 billion.