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

Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

californiaglobe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 386 posts

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#331

Post by ashtonkem »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #312
acranox wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Newegg is still okay if you limit to buying stuff from Newegg as the seller. Their marketplace is definitely full of junk.

Newegg commingles inventory so you don’t know whose inventory you will be buying from. See section 4.1: https://promotions.newegg.com/marketplace/PDF/SBNTermsAndCon...

Well, guess Newegg is losing a long term customer. The entire purpose of places like Newegg and B&H is to offer a slightly higher price in exchange for superior service and selection. If they're comingling inventory, there is no point to go with Newegg over Amazon.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#332

Post by ashtonkem »

ikeboy wrote: post #207
throwanem wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, no, you got lucky with that - I found out Amazon can't be trusted with high-ticket items by getting a $1200 lens that turned out to be gray market. Works fine, but I better hope I never need warranty service. Amazon can't be trusted with high-ticket items, including but not limited to camera equipment. Go to B&H or Adorama, or Newegg or Micro Center for high-ticket computer parts (cf. the recent spate of GPU sc…

Every retailer you mentioned deals in grey market products. Here's B&H proudly admitting to it: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/HelpCenter/USGrey.jsp

Most people are fine with gray market if:

1. It's explicit 2. There is a discount

The worst possible outcome is paying legitimate prices and receiving a gray market item.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#333

Post by kirillzubovsky »

ukulele wrote: post #298
kirillzubovsky wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, on the contrary, imagine you went to Safeway, and they sold you a carton of juice. You came home, and found out the juice was poisoned. According to this ruling, Safeway, the delivery company, the guy who moved the boxes, and everyone in between you and the manufacturer, are all at fault. Isn't that plain crazy? Safeway has no control over the juice in the box, except for being able to follow their own guid…

Amazon (and all the others you've mentioned) have the ability to choose their suppliers. There isn't piss in the Gatorade nor nails in the M&Ms because this is a solved problem: make companies liable for their supply chains.

Interesting. I view it as the opposite. Making the retailer liable forces them to use established supply chains and that is why we end up with M&Ms and other junk food at gas stations, instead of home-made buns, sandwiches and other food that doesn't come in a tube.

I am note sure what's the right answer. Just thinking out loud.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#334

Post by rossjudson »

xoxoy wrote: post #60

Shopping on Amazon has become unbearable for like 95% of categories these days. The experience is like rummaging through some shady tourist market with a dozen stall owners trying to scam you. The pricing is all whack with lots of counterfeits that have gamed the ranking and review systems. It’s just not worth trying to filter and find things that are actually competitively priced and sold directly by Amazon. Have no…

100% agreed. I was shopping for some recording gear earlier, and (habitually, I guess) checked amazon to see what was available. Zillions of things with brand names like "foofer" and "fifine" (yeah, I'm making those up, but you know what I mean).

What are those things, really? I don't know.

I hit Guitar Center instead, and there's this clearly presented list of brands that I mostly kind-of recognize, a simplified set of products.

The thing that amazon does really well is deliver things fast.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#335

Post by driverdan »

kirillzubovsky wrote: post #293
jarym wrote: post #9

Common sense. Amazon want to ‘own’ the customer relationship and go to great lengths to that end then it follows they will have to ‘own’ any liability too. Imagine you went into a retail store with a faulty product and they were to try fob you off saying you need to go to their supplier/wholesaler/manufacturer. It mostly doesn’t work that way thanks to most consumer protection laws in place.

Actually, on the contrary, imagine you went to Safeway, and they sold you a carton of juice. You came home, and found out the juice was poisoned. According to this ruling, Safeway, the delivery company, the guy who moved the boxes, and everyone in between you and the manufacturer, are all at fault. Isn't that plain crazy? Safeway has no control over the juice in the box, except for being able to follow their own guid…

> According to this ruling, Safeway, the delivery company, the guy who moved the boxes, and everyone in between you and the manufacturer, are all at fault.

I downvoted you because that's not what this ruling says. If you want to have an honest discussion be honest, don't use hyperbole.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#336

Post by rossjudson »

manigandham wrote: post #133
tedfernau wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could hardly disagree more. It takes some effort to find the good stuff, but Amazon is the superior way to shop online for most things.

I agree with you completely. I've yet to have a shoddy counterfeit product with thousands of purchases over a decade. Any actual problems are also solved within minutes. Can someone link a product listing that they received a counterfeit from?

https://www.amazon.com/TOPPING-es9018k2m-opa2134-Decoder-Amp...

"HIFI Audio Decoder Amplifier - Aimpire AD10 MINI USB DAC CSS XMOS XU208 ES9018K2M OPA2134 Audio Amplifier Decoder"

This is a fake. Strange how the URL says TOPPING but the product is from "Aimpire". Aimpire has been photoshopped into some, but not all of the product pictures (where TOPPING is still visible in a few).

Turns out that Aimpire has had a contentious relationship with Topping (the designer and manufacturer of the real thing), started making their own (inferior and unlicensed) versions of the Topping product.

Looks like this one is "sold by amazon.com". Huh. Guess it slipped by their counterfeit checkers.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#337

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

donmcronald wrote: post #324
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Wirecutter and then go search for the items I want on walmart.com, bestbuy.com, b&h, Barnes and noble, etc. I boycott Amazon. I feel jerked around any time I use their site.

Wirecutter is an affiliate marketer. If they reviewed 15 pieces of shit they'd recommend a top 3 to buy based on taste. Almost all of the review sites are like that now. Look up the story of Casper and Sleepopolis. Today's review sites are predominantly filled with advertising disguised as reviews.

They're good enough. To me the alternative is Reddit or online reviews on the seller website which are even more unreliable. And the alternative to that is to spend countless hours researching things myself.

Is Consumer Reports any good?

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#338

Post by manigandham »

quesera wrote: post #222
manigandham wrote: post #128

I've had nothing but good experience with Amazon over the past 10 years. Very few problems but when there is, it's a few minutes to get a replacement or refund immediately, including complicated scenarios like promos, out of date returns, and warranty claims. I must not be the only one with good experiences if they're doing so well. Then again I also check to make sure I'm buying direct from Amazon and reading the mo…

Agree with the experience: Amazon has never done me wrong. Disagree with the context: You're making the mistake of saying that you do things the proper way and if others would follow your lead, they might have better experiences also. People who have been wronged don't like to hear that other people think it's kind of their fault. Not saying you think, or said, this: but there's a bit of victim-blaming going on. This…

That's helpful, I should've been more clear.

Most products I don't really check and have been fine. What I was trying to convey was that expensive, specialized or esoteric items have more scam potential which should require more review before buying (not that Amazon isn't still at fault).

However people are claiming here that 95% of orders are bad and that's just hard to believe. The business would collapse tomorrow if that were the case for any serious number of people, and why would a person keep buying if that's all they were getting?

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#339

Post by manigandham »

rossjudson wrote: post #336
manigandham wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you completely. I've yet to have a shoddy counterfeit product with thousands of purchases over a decade. Any actual problems are also solved within minutes. Can someone link a product listing that they received a counterfeit from?

https://www.amazon.com/TOPPING-es9018k2m-opa2134-Decoder-Amp... "HIFI Audio Decoder Amplifier - Aimpire AD10 MINI USB DAC CSS XMOS XU208 ES9018K2M OPA2134 Audio Amplifier Decoder" This is a fake. Strange how the URL says TOPPING but the product is from "Aimpire". Aimpire has been photoshopped into some, but not all of the product pictures (where TOPPING is still visible in a few). Turns out that Aimpire has had a con…

Interesting, thanks for the link.

This is a strange case. The reviews seem to say people are buying the Topping product but getting the Aimpire product. But if you buy from this page, you're knowingly purchasing the Aimpire version. Are people buying Topping from another listing and getting this?

EDIT: never mind, looks like this product used to say Topping and was changed, and that's why the URL is still the original wording. That's clearly a scam then.

Re: Amazon Liable for Defective Third-Party Products Rules CA Appellate Court

#340

Post by myself248 »

dangus wrote: post #238
myself248 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I'm wondering if I can establish personal nexus in CA sufficient to qualify for such protections, while continuing to reside in place without all the Californians...

There’s something off about this comment, and simultaneously I’m aware that my response is reading way too far into it . The last phrase you use continues to perpetuate the odd perception that Californians are weird extreme hippie aliens that Middle America should avoid at all costs. And then, your comment simultaneously envies California’s strong worker and consumer protections. It’s almost as if Californians aren’t…

Oh no, I love the weird extreme hippie aliens. And the strong worker and consumer protections. It's the Hollywood and the Disney and the Dot-com bros I'm avoiding at exactly those other costs.

That plus the completely unsustainable water situation that I refuse to be a part of worsening.

Post reply on HN