Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

blog.aboutamazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 247 posts

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#121

Post by kube-system »

jbay808 wrote: post #49
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious about the incentive that leads to this. If you're going to print and sell counterfeit textbooks, why not use the actual content? Surely nearly every copy with a random other book will be returned. Is it possible that they meant to include the right content, but they counterfeit lots of books and have low quality control? My best guess is that they can easily grab a copy of a book's cover online, but actua…

I was also very confused. If you're going to sell a fake book, why not just fill it with blank pages? Why go to the extra effort? Did they really think I wasn't going to notice when I opened it and it was full of information about hamsters? Were they hoping I'd just put it on my bookshelf and never actually read it? We concluded that they probably run some kind of big automated print-on-demand counterfeiting operatio…

I'm guessing it's because they didn't manufacture the book at all -- they probably took a used book that was worth next to nothing and put a new cover on it, hoping that some people wouldn't open it until their return window closed?

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#122

Post by 908087 »

HereBeBeasties wrote: post #69
throwawayiionqz wrote: post #29

I ordered a well-known baby-bottom cream. The product gave her never-expanding rashes for a few days. Then I realized the color slightly differs from the same cream bought at the local pharmacy, and that many 1 star reviews also report knockoffs version of the cream. In some cases review pictures show that the packaging itself is clearly fake. I write a 1-star review explaining the above, and saying that the anxious…

I wrote a detailed, solid, accurate 1 star review of a child's digital camera which clearly didn't contravene their guidelines. Didn't meet their guidelines, wouldn't publish it. Amazon used to be great. Nowadays it's full of fake reviews and dodgy secondhand stuff being sold as new.

Of my past 10 orders with Amazon, 4 of the items I've received have been either non-functional, the wrong item entirely (a knock-off of an APC replacement battery), or clearly used.

Amazon has refused to publish every one of my reviews, which, as you said in your situation, clearly met their guidelines.

My experiences indicate to me that they have no interest in improving. They're far more interested in protecting shady sellers from buyers than they are in protecting buyers from shady sellers, counterfeit products, etc.

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#123

Post by markdown »

mike_d wrote: post #97
pjc50 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone confirm if this happens in countries with functioning consumer protection? Or is it just an Amazon.us thing?

Even with strong consumer protections, the bad actors are often based overseas. There is little to no incentive for the Chinese government to inhibit fraud taking place in the US or Europe.

> Even with strong consumer protections, the bad actors are often based overseas.

Nope. There aren't many countries that allow foreigners who've never set foot in their country to sell product there without local representation.

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#124

Post by ckastner »

dublinben wrote: post #104
ckastner wrote: post #52

I've said this before: they should look at how the finance industry deals / has been dealing with bad actors for decades before they engage in a business relationship with a client. Assign every vendor some risk category based on their profile, for example: projected annual revenue, country of incorporation, products sold. A mom-and-pop store located somewhere in Iowa selling pillow cases would probably be low-risk,…

Speaking of incentives, why would Amazon want to place such onerous restrictions on their suppliers? Are consumers supposed to demand this? Would regulation require it? Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.

> why would Amazon want to place such onerous restrictions on their suppliers?

Because they have a massive counterfeiting problem, as evident by this submission.

To reiterate, what I suggested would only be onerous for the highest-risk suppliers.

> Amazon's success at being "the everything store" is fundamentally opposed to vetting their suppliers like this.

Certainly, Amazon is also fundamentally opposed to customers becoming victims of counterfeiters on a platform they provide them with.

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#125

Post by calimac »

kube-system wrote: post #118
snarf21 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is so simple to solve and they don't have to have a crimes unit to do it. Simply segment reviews and ratings based on seller. All you have to do is have each seller put a scannable sticker on each product based each batch going through intake. You can even still colocate. Then all the returns and bad reviews go to the right person and they can just get banned. This is not rocket surgery.

Amazon has a program for this: https://brandservices.amazon.com/transparency

Really? How is it working considering the number of counterfeits flowing out of the Amazon warehouses daily?

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#128

Post by dylan604 »

rckoepke wrote: post #107
dylan604 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming they want to fix the problem

Not sure that level of snark is appropriate for HN. Not that I explicitly disagree with you, of course. It's just we gotta have a higher bar around here. I'd love to see substantial elaboration on the topic that adds to the discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should be more thoughtful and substantive, not les…

You're assuming snark was implied. I honestly do not believe that Amazon feels that this is a problem that needs to be solved. Before Amazon bans sellers/buyers, it needs to have total control of the market. At that point, it can decide what it wants to do.

I've seen you post this reply several times lately (even today alone). Maybe you should attempt to contribute more to the conversation yourself rather than being a 6 month old account playing hall monitor.

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#129

Post by [deleted] »

baybal2 wrote: post #113
rckoepke wrote: post #11

The categories of things that I've received counterfeit versions of on Amazon have been truly mind-blowing. It's been replacement HEPA filters, cat toys, even breakfast cereal. It's not just earphones/mics, batteries, usb cables, flash drives, extension cords, and other electronics. Who counterfeits breakfast cereal??? I've had this issue with both Quaker Oats and Raisin Bran. The scale of fraud is magnificent. And i…

> Who counterfeits breakfast cereal??? I've had this issue with both Quaker Oats and Raisin Bran. The scale of fraud is magnificent. And it really gaslights consumers; it took me forever to actually accept that I was eating an off-brand imitation of my favorite cereals. Take a look on what is going in China for a fast forward look into the future. What you see in China now is exactly that. Pro counterfeiters mostly m…

[deleted]

Re: Amazon establishes new Counterfeit Crimes Unit

#130

Post by donmcronald »

vageli wrote: post #58
ckastner wrote: post #52

I've said this before: they should look at how the finance industry deals / has been dealing with bad actors for decades before they engage in a business relationship with a client. Assign every vendor some risk category based on their profile, for example: projected annual revenue, country of incorporation, products sold. A mom-and-pop store located somewhere in Iowa selling pillow cases would probably be low-risk,…

> Now, banks don't do this (at least, as far as I'm aware), but to play the devil's advocate: just imagine if Amazon asked very-high-risk vendors to post collateral before selling. If they get caught, the collateral is used to compensate victims. Requiring merchants to be bonded for entry into high-risk categories sounds like a great idea! I know they already have hurdles for entry into protected categories like vita…

In theory I think requiring a cash bond could improve many distribution systems, but the reality is that these big tech companies are so terrible at moderation and curation that we'd end up with tons of people having their bonds seized for no reason. Then, since there's actual money involved, those people might actually have some recourse, so it'll never happen IMO.
Post reply on HN