3 ms·

What Shopify did wrong was that it wasn’t fast enough to respond with transparency. However, I do agree with them in requiring proof that 3rd party sellers have

What Shopify did wrong was that it wasn’t fast enough to respond with transparency. However, I do agree with them in requiring proof that 3rd party sellers have a legal right to sell “trademarked” or “branded” products especially for books. Amazon is so rife with fake products that it’s no better than eBay now. I can no longer impulse buy on Amazon. Depending on the product, I will check if there are 3rd party sellers using Amazon warehousing. If there’s any evidence of commingling, I just buy it elsewhere. We’ve been slowly using Target more and more since they have limits on inventory commingling.

LegitShady 4y ago
>I do agree with them in requiring proof that 3rd party sellers have a legal right to sell “trademarked” or “branded” products especially for books. lets say a bookstore goes out of business and I buy their stock and sell it in my own store. Do I need proof that I have legal right to sell those books? First sale doctrine is established law - your discomfort with 'fake' books has nothing to do with anything - no one said anything about counterfeit goods. They're asking them to get some 'proof' they can sell merchandise they bought to sell.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  Shopify doesn’t want potential fakes, and many customers like myself are sick of them. My discomfort with shady 3rd party sellers has a lot to do with it because I will take my business elsewhere, or eat up customer support hours and ramp up costs related to returns and exchanges. It’s a free market. There are plenty of other online platforms to choose from that don’t care whether or not they sell fake garbage. You can also create your own online store if needed. Apt username
- askafriend 4y ago
  As a customer, yes I will require proof before buying anything from your hypothetical store. If Shopify can provide that assurance to me - I will transact on Shopify-hosted stores more with confidence.
- tzs 4y ago
  The first sale doctrine (both the copyright first sale doctrine and the trademark first sale doctrine) doesn't apply to counterfeits.
ffguuficc 4y ago
I just was about to buy P100 filters on Amazon but all the listings say they are fake. Amazon combines the inventory of all the “same” product together and it lets fakes get through. For me, it’s not worth the risk of getting a faulty filter so I’m just going to Ace. As you said Amazon needs to crack down on these counterfeits.
amluto 4y ago
I’m not entirely convinced that Shopify should be involved in IP enforcement. Amazon, despite all their claims to the contrary, acts as a retailer. When shopping at Amazon, Amazon is helping you find products and even makes it look like Amazon is selling them. Shopify, in contrast, stays in the background. For the most part, unless I recognize the checkout flow or see the shoppay option, I, as a customer, don’t even know that Shopify is involved in a transaction. I’m not buying, in any material sense, from Shopify.
- theturtletalks 4y ago
  It's MC/Visa that's forcing Stripe and therefore Shopify to "police" for trademarked goods. MC/Visa are effectively determining what people can and cannot sell online. If the US accused you of selling trademarked goods, the burden of proof is on them. With MC/Visa, good luck getting a chance to even provide proof.
  - arrosenberg 4y ago
    That’s an even bigger antitrust issue, because processors shouldn’t be policing Shopify without doing it to Amazon.
    - amluto 4y ago
      It’s not antitrust because it’s not (as far as I know) against the law. That being said, I think that VISA and MasterCard should be required to act as common carriers and to serve any lawful business (where lawfulness is determined by courts, not by VISA and MC).
      - mchusma 4y ago
        I agree here. Dealing with visa/Mastercard is the worst.
  - tebbers 4y ago
    Exactly this. The Financial Times just had a good exposé on this recently about Visa and MC and the adult industry. The processors shut a huge amount of sites down because they refused to process their payments any more because some hedge fund bro who was anti-porn knew the MC CEO. They completely control commerce online. https://www.ft.com/content/cff23e36-b507-4717-8830-8b06741c8fd5 https://www.ft.com/content/cff23e36-b507-4717-8830-8b06741c8...
potamic 4y ago
Even if there are no 3rd party sellers currently, it's possible they were active before and the current stock is still commingled. The only thing I use Amazon these days is for white-labeled Chinese goods. For everything else I prefer retailers with an end to end supply chain.
- philliphaydon 4y ago
  Buying from Amazon can be really frustrating to buy from. I was looking for wool the other day. 100% Australian wool. But it’s spun in China. 100% Canadian cotton yarn!!! Spun in China… it’s hard to find something not made in China even if you’re willing to pay for it.
LaundroMat 4y ago
I'm afraid the EU Digital Services Act (which states that platforms are not "liable for hosting content unless they know it is illegal") will lead to more problems like this. Platforms will want to be safe, and will content block up-front, meaning it's the user who has to prove the legality of what they are selling. Good luck with that (as the Twitter thread demonstrates).

LegitShady 4y ago

>I do agree with them in requiring proof that 3rd party sellers have a legal right to sell “trademarked” or “branded” products especially for books. lets say a bookstore goes out of business and I buy their stock and sell it in my own store. Do I need proof that I have legal right to sell those books? First sale doctrine is established law - your discomfort with 'fake' books has nothing to do with anything - no one said anything about counterfeit goods. They're asking them to get some 'proof' they can sell merchandise they bought to sell.

chaostheory 4y ago
Shopify doesn’t want potential fakes, and many customers like myself are sick of them. My discomfort with shady 3rd party sellers has a lot to do with it because I will take my business elsewhere, or eat up customer support hours and ramp up costs related to returns and exchanges. It’s a free market. There are plenty of other online platforms to choose from that don’t care whether or not they sell fake garbage. You can also create your own online store if needed. Apt username
askafriend 4y ago
As a customer, yes I will require proof before buying anything from your hypothetical store. If Shopify can provide that assurance to me - I will transact on Shopify-hosted stores more with confidence.
tzs 4y ago
The first sale doctrine (both the copyright first sale doctrine and the trademark first sale doctrine) doesn't apply to counterfeits.

ffguuficc 4y ago

I just was about to buy P100 filters on Amazon but all the listings say they are fake. Amazon combines the inventory of all the “same” product together and it lets fakes get through. For me, it’s not worth the risk of getting a faulty filter so I’m just going to Ace. As you said Amazon needs to crack down on these counterfeits.

amluto 4y ago

I’m not entirely convinced that Shopify should be involved in IP enforcement. Amazon, despite all their claims to the contrary, acts as a retailer. When shopping at Amazon, Amazon is helping you find products and even makes it look like Amazon is selling them. Shopify, in contrast, stays in the background. For the most part, unless I recognize the checkout flow or see the shoppay option, I, as a customer, don’t even know that Shopify is involved in a transaction. I’m not buying, in any material sense, from Shopify.

theturtletalks 4y ago
It's MC/Visa that's forcing Stripe and therefore Shopify to "police" for trademarked goods. MC/Visa are effectively determining what people can and cannot sell online. If the US accused you of selling trademarked goods, the burden of proof is on them. With MC/Visa, good luck getting a chance to even provide proof.
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  That’s an even bigger antitrust issue, because processors shouldn’t be policing Shopify without doing it to Amazon.
  - amluto 4y ago
    It’s not antitrust because it’s not (as far as I know) against the law. That being said, I think that VISA and MasterCard should be required to act as common carriers and to serve any lawful business (where lawfulness is determined by courts, not by VISA and MC).
    - mchusma 4y ago
      I agree here. Dealing with visa/Mastercard is the worst.
- tebbers 4y ago
  Exactly this. The Financial Times just had a good exposé on this recently about Visa and MC and the adult industry. The processors shut a huge amount of sites down because they refused to process their payments any more because some hedge fund bro who was anti-porn knew the MC CEO. They completely control commerce online. https://www.ft.com/content/cff23e36-b507-4717-8830-8b06741c8fd5 https://www.ft.com/content/cff23e36-b507-4717-8830-8b06741c8...

potamic 4y ago

Even if there are no 3rd party sellers currently, it's possible they were active before and the current stock is still commingled. The only thing I use Amazon these days is for white-labeled Chinese goods. For everything else I prefer retailers with an end to end supply chain.

philliphaydon 4y ago
Buying from Amazon can be really frustrating to buy from. I was looking for wool the other day. 100% Australian wool. But it’s spun in China. 100% Canadian cotton yarn!!! Spun in China… it’s hard to find something not made in China even if you’re willing to pay for it.

LaundroMat 4y ago

I'm afraid the EU Digital Services Act (which states that platforms are not "liable for hosting content unless they know it is illegal") will lead to more problems like this. Platforms will want to be safe, and will content block up-front, meaning it's the user who has to prove the legality of what they are selling. Good luck with that (as the Twitter thread demonstrates).