4 ms·

So, to be clear, you have no problem with Amazon writing their own laws and collecting their own taxes? Because that is what they are effectively doing.

scarface_74 3y ago
Every company has the right to set the terms and fees to use them. A “tax” is something you are mandated to pay. I get plenty of crap advertised to me on FB that you can’t find on Amazon.
endisneigh 3y ago
If sellers were obligated to sell on Amazon that would be the case, but it's not, is it? Ironically, people complaining about this are exacerbating the issue. If sellers who actually cared left Amazon it would loosen Amazon's dominance in e-commerce.
- tartuffe78 3y ago
  They're obligated to by the grip Amazon already has on the e-commerce market. Letting Amazon make anti-competitive moves that increase their grip will only worsen the situation.
  - endisneigh 3y ago
    This grip you're describing only exists because they don't leave, and nothing is stopping them. Again, no one is forcing people to sell on Amazon. They could use Shopify or sell on eBay. People act as if you have to sell on Amazon. You don't. That assumption and expectation is why Amazon is dominant to begin with. Sellers should leave if they don't like it, and that will naturally soften Amazon dominance.
    - anonymousab 3y ago
      > and nothing is stopping them. Imminent collapse and bankruptcy when they leave due to Amazon's dominant market position. That you can set up a shop anywhere does not mean anything when all of your potential customers are only going to the Amazon digital strip mall.
    - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
      Listen, maybe you've never heard about antitrust law, but using one's dominant market position to maintain dominance in the market to the injury of consumers is pretty much the exact definition of an antitrust violation in the US. So write your local congressman complaining that antitrust law is restricting your ability to lick Jeff Bezo's boots, or run away to the Rockies somewhere and start a radically laissez faire community where everyone's asking about John Galt, but as the law stands in this country, it's illegal, and that's a good thing.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        Just maybe some people don’t think that the government having more power and control is a good thing? 37% is not a monopoly. If you have a differentiate product, you can set up your own website through Shopify or any number of places. And if you haven’t been paying attention, the FTC has been laughed out of court for the last five years every time it has gone after BigTech
        OkayPhysicist 3y ago
        What possible complaint could you have about government overreach that doesn't equally apply to corporations? Antitrust law is the only thing standing between us and a corpohellscape "America, an Alphabet Company".
        scarface_74 3y ago
        Government has the power of the state to force their wills on people. Please tell me a scenario where an adtech company will gain the ability to take away my rights and property the way the government can? The government has a “monopoly on the legal use of force”. Look no further than Florida to see what an overzealous government can do when you disagree with them or the police that raided a newspaper office because they reported on police corruption. I’m much more worried about when the police are behind me because “I don’t look like I belong” in my own neighborhood than the Google car mapping my street.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  I've often seen the complaint that developers think the law is purely strategic, like a computer, and if they can find a technicality then the law must follow through. But that's not how this works. It's technically true that fiber has competition if another ISP is offering dialup in the same area. No one in their right mind would agree that's actually a competitor in anything but name. And so it is here. If not selling on Amazon is an existential risk for your company, Amazon is effectively a monopoly, and THAT is what the law cares about.
- stouset 3y ago
  Sellers are in effect obligated to sell on Amazon, because the alternative is “go out of business”. That’s the whole goddamn point of FTC intervention.

scarface_74 3y ago

Every company has the right to set the terms and fees to use them. A “tax” is something you are mandated to pay. I get plenty of crap advertised to me on FB that you can’t find on Amazon.

endisneigh 3y ago

If sellers were obligated to sell on Amazon that would be the case, but it's not, is it? Ironically, people complaining about this are exacerbating the issue. If sellers who actually cared left Amazon it would loosen Amazon's dominance in e-commerce.

tartuffe78 3y ago
They're obligated to by the grip Amazon already has on the e-commerce market. Letting Amazon make anti-competitive moves that increase their grip will only worsen the situation.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  This grip you're describing only exists because they don't leave, and nothing is stopping them. Again, no one is forcing people to sell on Amazon. They could use Shopify or sell on eBay. People act as if you have to sell on Amazon. You don't. That assumption and expectation is why Amazon is dominant to begin with. Sellers should leave if they don't like it, and that will naturally soften Amazon dominance.
  - anonymousab 3y ago
    > and nothing is stopping them. Imminent collapse and bankruptcy when they leave due to Amazon's dominant market position. That you can set up a shop anywhere does not mean anything when all of your potential customers are only going to the Amazon digital strip mall.
  - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
    Listen, maybe you've never heard about antitrust law, but using one's dominant market position to maintain dominance in the market to the injury of consumers is pretty much the exact definition of an antitrust violation in the US. So write your local congressman complaining that antitrust law is restricting your ability to lick Jeff Bezo's boots, or run away to the Rockies somewhere and start a radically laissez faire community where everyone's asking about John Galt, but as the law stands in this country, it's illegal, and that's a good thing.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      Just maybe some people don’t think that the government having more power and control is a good thing? 37% is not a monopoly. If you have a differentiate product, you can set up your own website through Shopify or any number of places. And if you haven’t been paying attention, the FTC has been laughed out of court for the last five years every time it has gone after BigTech
      - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
        What possible complaint could you have about government overreach that doesn't equally apply to corporations? Antitrust law is the only thing standing between us and a corpohellscape "America, an Alphabet Company".
        scarface_74 3y ago
        Government has the power of the state to force their wills on people. Please tell me a scenario where an adtech company will gain the ability to take away my rights and property the way the government can? The government has a “monopoly on the legal use of force”. Look no further than Florida to see what an overzealous government can do when you disagree with them or the police that raided a newspaper office because they reported on police corruption. I’m much more worried about when the police are behind me because “I don’t look like I belong” in my own neighborhood than the Google car mapping my street.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
I've often seen the complaint that developers think the law is purely strategic, like a computer, and if they can find a technicality then the law must follow through. But that's not how this works. It's technically true that fiber has competition if another ISP is offering dialup in the same area. No one in their right mind would agree that's actually a competitor in anything but name. And so it is here. If not selling on Amazon is an existential risk for your company, Amazon is effectively a monopoly, and THAT is what the law cares about.
stouset 3y ago
Sellers are in effect obligated to sell on Amazon, because the alternative is “go out of business”. That’s the whole goddamn point of FTC intervention.