5 ms·

I think a key thing is that a marketplace should be held liable if the actual seller cannot be held to account. They shouldn't be able to use "just a marketplac

by rlpb 4y ago

I think a key thing is that a marketplace should be held liable if the actual seller cannot be held to account. They shouldn't be able to use "just a marketplace" as a shield to avoid liability when they're the only ones in a position to have vetted the real seller. This is how it works with credit card companies where I live. The credit card company is jointly liable with the supplier. It works fine and the consumer is protected. "Marketplaces" are still in the relative wild west when it comes to liability here.

merely-unlikely 4y ago
The flip side is then it becomes much harder for small companies to get their products approved on such marketplaces (to the benefit of larger competitors). There's a tradeoff and, like most things, some middle ground is probably best.
- wtallis 4y ago
  > There's a tradeoff and, like most things, some middle ground is probably best. This is a question of whether there should be any real accountability at all. We're currently at one extreme and debating whether to take the smallest step away from that; a real middle ground is a long ways off.
- mbreese 4y ago
  > The flip side is then it becomes much harder for small companies to get their products approved on such marketplaces So long as the marketplace can confirm that someone will take responsibility for product quality, I don’t see an issue. Smaller companies will be able to be more hands on with a marketplace. As in, actually having a person to communicate with customers and/or the marketplace. The problem only is an issue for fly by night sellers that just generate new identities when a marketplace delists them. Having a little bit of due diligence added to the marketplace is a good thing for both buyers and sellers.
- nucleardog 4y ago
  It doesn’t have to be anything super onerous. If the marketplace is jointly liable, it could be as simple as them then requiring sellers to have a typical $2m liability policy from a licensed insurance company naming the seller and marketplace and provide proof of insurance before selling. If anyone shows up to sue over the product, you just direct them to the insurance company. If you’re not doing anything dumb and don’t have a history of doing anything dumb, getting some basic liability insurance should be cheap and trivial. It completely outsources the costs and moderation and probably _saves_ the marketplace money versus the current arrangement. The only way you continue to sell a bunch of fake / dangerous products is if the insurance companies are taking losses on this. And they’ve shown themselves pretty adept at avoiding losses.
logifail 4y ago
> when they're the only ones in a position to have vetted the real seller I've yet to see any evidence that marketplaces are actually interested in vetting sellers ... or buyers, for that matter. Marketplaces are basically all about taking their % of the sale, yet getting to shrug and walk away if the transaction goes south.

by rlpb 4y ago

merely-unlikely 4y ago

The flip side is then it becomes much harder for small companies to get their products approved on such marketplaces (to the benefit of larger competitors). There's a tradeoff and, like most things, some middle ground is probably best.

wtallis 4y ago
> There's a tradeoff and, like most things, some middle ground is probably best. This is a question of whether there should be any real accountability at all. We're currently at one extreme and debating whether to take the smallest step away from that; a real middle ground is a long ways off.
mbreese 4y ago
> The flip side is then it becomes much harder for small companies to get their products approved on such marketplaces So long as the marketplace can confirm that someone will take responsibility for product quality, I don’t see an issue. Smaller companies will be able to be more hands on with a marketplace. As in, actually having a person to communicate with customers and/or the marketplace. The problem only is an issue for fly by night sellers that just generate new identities when a marketplace delists them. Having a little bit of due diligence added to the marketplace is a good thing for both buyers and sellers.
nucleardog 4y ago
It doesn’t have to be anything super onerous. If the marketplace is jointly liable, it could be as simple as them then requiring sellers to have a typical $2m liability policy from a licensed insurance company naming the seller and marketplace and provide proof of insurance before selling. If anyone shows up to sue over the product, you just direct them to the insurance company. If you’re not doing anything dumb and don’t have a history of doing anything dumb, getting some basic liability insurance should be cheap and trivial. It completely outsources the costs and moderation and probably _saves_ the marketplace money versus the current arrangement. The only way you continue to sell a bunch of fake / dangerous products is if the insurance companies are taking losses on this. And they’ve shown themselves pretty adept at avoiding losses.

logifail 4y ago

> when they're the only ones in a position to have vetted the real seller I've yet to see any evidence that marketplaces are actually interested in vetting sellers ... or buyers, for that matter. Marketplaces are basically all about taking their % of the sale, yet getting to shrug and walk away if the transaction goes south.