ikeboy

34 ms·

331.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Fun fact: Amazon has argued in litigation that it would take over 5,000 hours to collect sales information on a couple of thousand products. When they want to restrict data from their own teams, they can easily. Anyone who's ever dea
332.
by ikeboy 6y ago
What company can I go to for two day shipping on millions of products? The only company that's even close is Walmart, and Amazon still dwarfs their e-commerce sales.
333.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Amazon shouldn't compete with third party sellers, as it creates a conflict of interest that has been documented to lead to abuses. WSJ has a series of articles on such abuses. See e.g. https://www.wsj.com/articles&#x2F
334.
by ikeboy 6y ago
It's called "TA Xpath Builder" and easily found on Google. But I haven't updated it in years and it doesn't work on all sites, haven't actively promoted it since the initial launch. I do have a 30 day money bac
335.
by ikeboy 6y ago
This was more of a one-time launch, but I made around 25k off it. Half of that went to affiliates. Bit of background - lots of Amazon sellers use a software called tactical arbitrage that scrapes retailers to get prices and compares prices
336.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Maybe we'll get some DMCA reform now.
337.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Econ 101 distinguishes between buyers with market power and buyers without. You also need to distinguish between the expectations channel and the purchase channel. The Fed announcing it's going to pump money into the economy decreases
338.
by ikeboy 6y ago
>The lockdowns are already lifting and as we will see, you don’t just bring back 41+ million jobs at the drop of a hat. Well as I already said above, the Fed isn't doing enough. They aren't stabilizing prices. If they were, t
339.
by ikeboy 6y ago
We don't want to have full employment now for obvious reasons. Fed policy should be to enable full employment after the lockdowns are fully lifted, not now. Congress passed extra unemployment insurance plus other payroll support. The F
340.
by ikeboy 6y ago
I think the proper critique is exactly the opposite - that they're not doing enough. Inflation is expected to be well below target over the next decade. Critiques that they're doing too much fall completely flat, for me.
341.
by ikeboy 6y ago
I'm critiquing the framing in OP. >But we have no political imagination or will to think beyond what is forced down our throats. Either the Federal Reserve saves us all or we are doomed. I wouldn't view it as saving. The Fed&#x
342.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Somewhat, but to make that argument you'd have to show what percentage they're buying and how prices have moved. I don't think there's evidence of a large effect currently.
343.
by ikeboy 6y ago
It's irresponsible to say the taxpayers are eating losses that hasn't happened yet and may never happen. Taxpayers didn't lose in the TARP bailout, despite similar warnings at the time. And the other side of this is the fact
344.
by ikeboy 6y ago
The fact that $454 billion was set aside to eat losses does not imply that there will be $454 billion of losses, or even that there will be any losses. The Fed is buying bonds at market prices and getting paid interest - the only way they&#
345.
Ask HN: What would you pay $100/month+ for, if it existed?
3 points by ikeboy 6y ago|2 comments
346.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Amazon testified in 2016 that over 50% of DMCA notices received for Kindle Direct were bogus: > So with Kindle Direct publishing, authors routinely try to climb to the top spot in their category or the top of their browse note, as Amazon
347.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Mind explaining what acts you believe are covered by distribution rights and not under first sale?
348.
by ikeboy 6y ago
The US has a doctrine of first sale which says there is no right to control distribution. There's a right to control copying, that's it.
349.
by ikeboy 6y ago
>... except for the fact that a lawsuit allows you to recover that fee, and more damages—if you have a case to begin with. It's a recoverable cost, not a sunk cost. This wasn't specified in the original post. They said the mone
350.
by ikeboy 6y ago
The above proposal said the money was forfeited as soon as a counternotice is filed. Hence, no incentive to file a lawsuit. Regardless, filing a suit costs more money than they were proposing be put up in escrow. So at best it would be a we
351.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Why would there be such an expectation? What incentive would a copyright holder have to sue that they don't have under the current system?
352.
by ikeboy 6y ago
The problem is the other side is often judgement proof. And you might not know who the other side until you get a counter-notice with their contact information.
353.
by ikeboy 6y ago
The difference is that copyright is a right that involves making money, while the right to free speech doesn't always involve selling things. The sender of a notice is benefiting off of copyright in some way, while the alleged infringe
354.
by ikeboy 6y ago
>You would still want the copyright-infringing material removed regardless of their ability to pay. But it might not be cost effective to file a suit. Giving up after a blatantly false counter-notice is a reasonable choice today, not to
355.
by ikeboy 6y ago
I really like counternotices being free. You shouldn't have to pay for standing up for your rights. I'm open to payments for DMCA notices, but it shouldn't be forfeited just because someone filed a counternotice. I think a be
356.
by ikeboy 6y ago
Sounds too harsh for the first, unless $X is very low. What if you learn from the counternotice that they're not going to be able to be able to pay a judgement? And the second is also too harsh - you should have the opportunity to defe
357.
by ikeboy 6y ago
In what circumstances would escrowed money be forfeited? If the escrowed money doesn't go to the parties, then there's no incentive from either side to consider the other side's escrow when determining their actions. Or worse
358.
by ikeboy 6y ago
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/is-the-dmcas-notic... There's a hearing going on in the Senate today in two hours (linked in the article), if anyone wants to watch the livestream.
359.
by ikeboy 6y ago
We need strict liability for false DMCA notices plus automatic award of attorney fees in a successful 512(f) case. Would fix 95% of the abuse.
360.
by ikeboy 6y ago
https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2020/01/new-civil-fost... Several examples here.

More ›