Amazon must face US nationwide class action over third-party sales

Post by kamarg » Wed, Sep 03, 2025, 4:06 AM UTC

jazzyjackson wrote: post #62

crazygringo wrote: post #4

> The consumers’ 2021 lawsuit said Amazon violated antitrust law by restricting third-party sellers from offering their products for lower prices elsewhere on rival platforms while they are also for sale on Amazon. I've noticed that third-party sellers generally get around this by having the same list price on their own site, but basically offering everyone a coupon for 15-30% off. Not just for signing up for e-mails…

I immediately just click the back button when some spin wheel discount thing pops up, I just figured it was temu leaking. Thank you for explaining why they are doing this, tho I still wonder why it has to be gamified and not just, click here for a coupon, is it because the agreement with Amazon precludes them from offering coupons, but neglects to forbid casino games?

Post by cindyllm » Wed, Sep 03, 2025, 4:11 AM UTC

johnnienaked wrote: post #92

crazygringo wrote: post #4

> The consumers’ 2021 lawsuit said Amazon violated antitrust law by restricting third-party sellers from offering their products for lower prices elsewhere on rival platforms while they are also for sale on Amazon. I've noticed that third-party sellers generally get around this by having the same list price on their own site, but basically offering everyone a coupon for 15-30% off. Not just for signing up for e-mails…

No not easily. Also, amazon straight up steals successful products from 3rd party sellers, rebrands them as Amazon basics, and then undercuts until the 3rd party seller goes out of business

Post by mystraline » Wed, Sep 03, 2025, 5:09 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #18

p1necone wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately this approach seems to fly all the time for large businesses. Plucky startup takes the 'ask forgiveness rather than permission' approach and ignores a bunch of regulations, legal system doesn't care because they're just a plucky startup. 10 or so years later plucky startup is a massive corpo, another 5 or so years later the legal system catches up but they're a massive corpo making piles of cash and the…

>up but they're a massive corpo making piles of cash and the worst the legal system can do at that point is penalize them with the equivalent of pocket change compared to the piles of cash they made while ignoring those regulations. Examples? Usually when I see this argument being brought up, it's usually something like "[multinational megacorp] fined $x for breaking Belgian privacy laws", and then people pile in say…

Post by Frieren » Wed, Sep 03, 2025, 6:12 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #13

shayway wrote: post #10

> Amazon argued that the class was too large to be manageable Sorry, we've wronged too many people to be held accountable! What a wild argument.

Looking at Amazon's filings, the argument they made is the following: >Given the unprecedented size of the proposed class consisting of 288 million members, the individualized issues on which their claims depend, and the overwhelming evidence that the challenged conduct resulted in lower prices in Amazon’s store, Plaintiffs have not—and cannot demonstrate that a class action would be manageable. The "individualized i…

Post by LunaSea » Wed, Sep 03, 2025, 7:46 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #43

solardev wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is only proving the parent's point, that the legal system is completely unable to deal with the megacorps. Shrug. I don't read those results the same way you do.

...or megacorps have functional legal departments to stop them from doing obviously illegal stuff. Of the cases they actually get sued for, there's enough complexity and genuine question of law that they can't straightforwardly prosecuted. There's a reason why basically all states had to pass bills to reclassify gig work companies, rather than winning slam dunk cases with years of back pay. In cases companies megacor…