4 ms·

This whole legislation is a huge waste of time as a way to fight fraud and fake products. Do you really expect the consumer to try to track down some person via

This whole legislation is a huge waste of time as a way to fight fraud and fake products. Do you really expect the consumer to try to track down some person via their address (which may be a PO Box) and try to sue them, only to have them say their merchandise was actually mixed with others and so they are not liable? The much better version is to make Amazon fully liable for everything they sell, even third party merchandise. Amazon can then figure out what it needs to do to fix the issue. Consumers shouldn’t have to worry about it.

tomschlick 5y ago
> Do you really expect the consumer to try to track down some person via their address Product manufacturers track these unauthorized sellers and do pretty deep investigations into who they are to stop counterfeit / unauthorized distribution. Source: I worked on software that tracked pricing and unauthorized sellers for 4 years.
- blairanderson 5y ago
  Very FEW product manufacturers track these unauthorized sellers. Amazon should require the store name to MATCH the llc/corp name and they should require a US registered agent to be publicly displayed as well. Source: I actively manage about 30 different vendor/seller accounts as a consultant. Tracking sellers is a fools errand.
  - tomschlick 5y ago
    That's absolutely false in my experience. I can't speak for who I worked for or our large client list, but there were quite a few fortune 50/100 companies in there, and many many others monitoring MAP and unauthorized sellers. Tooling to track down unauthorized sellers was one of the top features that was requested and used. You'll often see sites like Amazon match the pricing of a smaller unauthorized seller. Amazon's response to a MAP enforcement email in that case is when you stop the other guy, we will go back to MAP. So it is very important to stay on top of those sellers.
    - IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
      You are both correct Parent is right. Small manuf / authorized resellers get shafted and have no resources to do this sort of audit work. Fortune 500 have tight integrations with partners and proper controls in place to identify where the leaks are and to address them. Amazon opening up names of sellers will help parricularly small firms that dont have the sophisticated means that large fortune500 firms have to root out unauthorized sellers
watertom 5y ago
Amazon doesn't want to be liable for ANYTHING, they just want to sell stuff and make money any way they can. The business/GOP view of the world is that responsibility is for individuals not corporations. Freeing corporations so they can do whatever they want without fear.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
notriddle 5y ago
I don’t expect consumers to track down fake Ball lids and Apple chargers. I expect Ball and Apple to do that.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  In civilized countries you have consumer watchdogs that deal with fraud and unsafe products so the consumer doesn't have to. The point of the law isn't to catch criminals, it's to prevent crime.
  - paulpauper 5y ago
    consumer watchdogs are useless. the only good deterrent against fraud is jail time
  - zo1 5y ago
    The watchdogs can't do anything because the sellers are essentially spam themselves. That is why Amazon has NNN thousand new "stores" opening everyday and why they have a billion variations of the exact same product. There is NO way that any sort of entity outside of Amazon can make heads or tails of that volume of data in order protect the consumer. And Amazon is complicit in this just as much as Aliexpress and all the other platforms that are enabling product spam coming from China.
- rdtwo 5y ago
  I expect amazon to not sell them and to get as sued by Apple and Ball if they do
- spfzero 5y ago
  So it would make sense that Ball and Apple would need to find out who the seller was, from Amazon. Amazon at least knows where to send the checks, and likely a lot more about these businesses. What bothers me about Amazon is that they are actively providing anonymity to enterprises engaged in consumer-hostile activities including fraud, and are resisting efforts to pierce the shield they are providing.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

tomschlick 5y ago

> Do you really expect the consumer to try to track down some person via their address Product manufacturers track these unauthorized sellers and do pretty deep investigations into who they are to stop counterfeit / unauthorized distribution. Source: I worked on software that tracked pricing and unauthorized sellers for 4 years.

blairanderson 5y ago
Very FEW product manufacturers track these unauthorized sellers. Amazon should require the store name to MATCH the llc/corp name and they should require a US registered agent to be publicly displayed as well. Source: I actively manage about 30 different vendor/seller accounts as a consultant. Tracking sellers is a fools errand.
- tomschlick 5y ago
  That's absolutely false in my experience. I can't speak for who I worked for or our large client list, but there were quite a few fortune 50/100 companies in there, and many many others monitoring MAP and unauthorized sellers. Tooling to track down unauthorized sellers was one of the top features that was requested and used. You'll often see sites like Amazon match the pricing of a smaller unauthorized seller. Amazon's response to a MAP enforcement email in that case is when you stop the other guy, we will go back to MAP. So it is very important to stay on top of those sellers.
  - IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
    You are both correct Parent is right. Small manuf / authorized resellers get shafted and have no resources to do this sort of audit work. Fortune 500 have tight integrations with partners and proper controls in place to identify where the leaks are and to address them. Amazon opening up names of sellers will help parricularly small firms that dont have the sophisticated means that large fortune500 firms have to root out unauthorized sellers

watertom 5y ago

Amazon doesn't want to be liable for ANYTHING, they just want to sell stuff and make money any way they can. The business/GOP view of the world is that responsibility is for individuals not corporations. Freeing corporations so they can do whatever they want without fear.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

notriddle 5y ago

I don’t expect consumers to track down fake Ball lids and Apple chargers. I expect Ball and Apple to do that.

HarryHirsch 5y ago
In civilized countries you have consumer watchdogs that deal with fraud and unsafe products so the consumer doesn't have to. The point of the law isn't to catch criminals, it's to prevent crime.
- paulpauper 5y ago
  consumer watchdogs are useless. the only good deterrent against fraud is jail time
- zo1 5y ago
  The watchdogs can't do anything because the sellers are essentially spam themselves. That is why Amazon has NNN thousand new "stores" opening everyday and why they have a billion variations of the exact same product. There is NO way that any sort of entity outside of Amazon can make heads or tails of that volume of data in order protect the consumer. And Amazon is complicit in this just as much as Aliexpress and all the other platforms that are enabling product spam coming from China.
rdtwo 5y ago
I expect amazon to not sell them and to get as sued by Apple and Ball if they do
spfzero 5y ago
So it would make sense that Ball and Apple would need to find out who the seller was, from Amazon. Amazon at least knows where to send the checks, and likely a lot more about these businesses. What bothers me about Amazon is that they are actively providing anonymity to enterprises engaged in consumer-hostile activities including fraud, and are resisting efforts to pierce the shield they are providing.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]