3 ms·

Amazon certainly has standing for how YOU access amazon, even if it was in a regular browser.

by advisedwang 12d ago

eigencoder 12d ago
What do you mean?
- dcrazy 12d ago
  Amazon is a party to interactions with their website. That gives them standing to sue over those interactions. Whether they can sue Perplexity specifically is what was being debated in these motions.
  - eigencoder 12d ago
    I think I get it. Like they'd have standing to sue if I tried to hack their website, or change the price of items or something.
  - shimman 11d ago
    Nah, once you have the bits on your device you should be free to do with them whatever you want. Amazon doesn't get to dictate how you consume what they give out for free.
    - dcrazy 11d ago
      What you think you should be able to do with the data you get back from contacting Amazon’s servers doesn’t impact whether Amazon has standing to sue you over how and why you contacted their servers.
      - shimman 11d ago
        Sure and what you comment doesn't change that people have opinions about the validity of such cases. Amazon cares more about their bottom line than the health of their workers, we should be highly skeptical of anything they want to do as there is a strong chance that it will hurt + immiserate workers. Not all of us have the same bathroom fetish as Bezos.
        dcrazy 11d ago
        Your opinion about the “validity” of such a case is not really at home in a thread about _legal standing_.
        shimman 11d ago
        Sure it does, you're making a lot of assumptions here. The most egregious one is believing that that I think the legal system means anything to actual justice and not a system that is mostly used to protect the interests of the elite at the expense of the poor.
hightrix 12d ago
Access, yes. Display the content delivered from amazon.com, no absolutely not.
- bitpush 12d ago
  I'm trying to make sense of this and the best analogy I can find is using an example of physical products. 1. I can walk into Apple Store and buy Apple device (this is similar to me opening the browser and accessing amazon.com 2. If I'm busy, I can hire a person to go stand in line and buy the device (me asking Comet to shop on my behalf) The core question is does Apple (Amazon in this case) can block the hired help (Comet browser) from accessing the store. Most reasonable people would say "their store, their rules", so that goes to mean Amazon's website, Amazon's rules.
  - A1kmm 12d ago
    Maybe a better analogy: They can ban you from going through their drive through on a bicycle, but can they sue bicycle manufacturers because bike riders are going through their drive through? In this analogy, it seems the originating court said yes, they can sue the bicycle manufacturer (in the analogy), but on appeal the answer was no, they cannot. That seems like the appeals court got it right to me.
    - hatthew 12d ago
      I'm not familiar with the case, but to me it sounds like the bicycle manufacturer is encouraging people to use bikes in the drive through, maybe even providing specific tools explicitly for that purpose?
      - pests 11d ago
        Even if they were, is it illegal to sell something that might violate another companies TOS? There is entire categories of products whose entire intent is to circumvent some other products limitation or rules.
  - 12d ago

Amazon certainly has standing for how YOU access amazon, even if it was in a regular browser.

eigencoder 12d ago

What do you mean?

dcrazy 12d ago
Amazon is a party to interactions with their website. That gives them standing to sue over those interactions. Whether they can sue Perplexity specifically is what was being debated in these motions.
- eigencoder 12d ago
  I think I get it. Like they'd have standing to sue if I tried to hack their website, or change the price of items or something.
- shimman 11d ago
  Nah, once you have the bits on your device you should be free to do with them whatever you want. Amazon doesn't get to dictate how you consume what they give out for free.
  - dcrazy 11d ago
    What you think you should be able to do with the data you get back from contacting Amazon’s servers doesn’t impact whether Amazon has standing to sue you over how and why you contacted their servers.
    - shimman 11d ago
      Sure and what you comment doesn't change that people have opinions about the validity of such cases. Amazon cares more about their bottom line than the health of their workers, we should be highly skeptical of anything they want to do as there is a strong chance that it will hurt + immiserate workers. Not all of us have the same bathroom fetish as Bezos.
      - dcrazy 11d ago
        Your opinion about the “validity” of such a case is not really at home in a thread about _legal standing_.
        shimman 11d ago
        Sure it does, you're making a lot of assumptions here. The most egregious one is believing that that I think the legal system means anything to actual justice and not a system that is mostly used to protect the interests of the elite at the expense of the poor.

hightrix 12d ago

Access, yes. Display the content delivered from amazon.com, no absolutely not.

bitpush 12d ago
I'm trying to make sense of this and the best analogy I can find is using an example of physical products. 1. I can walk into Apple Store and buy Apple device (this is similar to me opening the browser and accessing amazon.com 2. If I'm busy, I can hire a person to go stand in line and buy the device (me asking Comet to shop on my behalf) The core question is does Apple (Amazon in this case) can block the hired help (Comet browser) from accessing the store. Most reasonable people would say "their store, their rules", so that goes to mean Amazon's website, Amazon's rules.
- A1kmm 12d ago
  Maybe a better analogy: They can ban you from going through their drive through on a bicycle, but can they sue bicycle manufacturers because bike riders are going through their drive through? In this analogy, it seems the originating court said yes, they can sue the bicycle manufacturer (in the analogy), but on appeal the answer was no, they cannot. That seems like the appeals court got it right to me.
  - hatthew 12d ago
    I'm not familiar with the case, but to me it sounds like the bicycle manufacturer is encouraging people to use bikes in the drive through, maybe even providing specific tools explicitly for that purpose?
    - pests 11d ago
      Even if they were, is it illegal to sell something that might violate another companies TOS? There is entire categories of products whose entire intent is to circumvent some other products limitation or rules.
- 12d ago