Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Businesses

DC Attorney General Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon (thehill.com) 34

Washington, D.C., Attorney General Karl Racine filed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon Tuesday, alleging that the e-commerce giant has unfairly raised prices and hurt innovation. From a report: The lawsuit filed in D.C. Superior Court claims that Amazon has engaged in anti-competitive business practices including not allowing third party sellers to offer their products at lower prices elsewhere and imposing excessive fees. The suit alleges that those practices have passed on fees to consumers in the form of higher prices, prevents other platforms from competing and takes away choices from consumers.

"Amazon has used its dominant position in the online retail market to win at all costs," Racine said in a statement. "It maximizes its profits at the expense of third-party sellers and consumers, while harming competition, stifling innovation, and illegally tilting the playing field in its favor."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DC Attorney General Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon

Comments Filter:
  • How are we to reconcile the allegations of

    not allowing third party sellers to offer their products at lower prices elsewhere

    and "raising prices"?

    The first one is called "lowering prices" in my mind.

    • Re:Contradictory? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by stikves ( 127823 ) on Tuesday May 25, 2021 @02:21PM (#61420756) Homepage

      Yes, Amazon did many shady things, but these accusations are not part of those.

      Did they "peek" at competitor metrics from the marketplace? Yes they did
      Did they knowingly host crappy products that were hazardous? Yes they did
      Did they do other nasty practices too many to list here? Yes, sure

      But were they unreasonable when they asked lowest prices be available on their site? Not so much
      Did they knowingly raise prices? No, their model is undercutting everyone

      This will just waste taxpayer money, and help Amazon avoid actual scrutiny.

      • Re:Contradictory? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Tuesday May 25, 2021 @02:41PM (#61420840)

        You need to comparison shop some more. Amazon is frequently not the cheapest. They just happen to stock everything.

      • Re:Contradictory? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Brain-Fu ( 1274756 ) on Tuesday May 25, 2021 @03:00PM (#61420918) Homepage Journal

        But were they unreasonable when they asked lowest prices be available on their site?

        Yes, when Amazon is the dominant market such that the only way to meaningfully compete against it is price, AND the "lowest price" must include the excessive fees that Amazon imposes, yes that is totally unreasonable. It prevents fair competition against Amazon and it raises prices for us all.


      • Amazon did many shady things

        Did they knowingly host crappy products that were hazardous? Yes they did

        Did they do other nasty practices too many to list here? Yes, sure

        Well gosh, what is the DC Attorney General so upset about, then? I mean, all they did was have too many nasty practices to list and do many shady things. Can’t we hug them instead? You risk jail time for stealing a candy bar, god forbid holding a company accountable.

        It sounds like the AG made a damn good case with regards to a

    • Re:Contradictory? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday May 25, 2021 @02:25PM (#61420774)

      Let's say that Wally makes widgets and sells them for $1 from his own shop.

      Then he decides to also sell on Amazon. But Amazon has transaction fees and stocking fees, so he has to raise the price to $2 to make a profit.

      Since Wally can't sell for less outside Amazon, he has to raise the price to $2 in his own shop as well.

      • In that case, why in the world would he want to sell on Amazon?

      • This is often gotten around by people having their own stores with discount codes. I often see a widget sold on Amazon, but if you go to the widget maker's website and type in a discount code, you can get it for 10-50 percent off the Amazon price. The price is still the same, which fulfills the letter of the contract, but the discount codes effectively allow for cheaper prices from the maker's shop.

      • People need to resist corporations attempting to control more and more of what you do on your own property.

        If they do not, they will be sorry, and their children and grandchildren will curse them.

        You’ve already let them take control of your own personal property away from you. Now, they can continue to use things you own to make money for themselves, and give you no cut of the profits. They’ve taken your ability to get root on your own computer. They already have you writing the content of the

        • People need to resist corporations attempting to control more and more of what you do on your own property.

          For that they'd need to stop worrying on stupid nonsense and focus on real problems. Alas, most people, on both sides of the political spectrum, prefer to put all of their energy into moralistic crusades. Economic and political elites love that and try to make people engage more and more in these topics, as the more distracted they are by trying to prevent their fellow proles from enjoying their own lives, the less effort they put into fixing any real issues.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Wouldn't it be nice if /. comments had to put disclaimers like "I am long on AMZN"

    • But we aren't suppose to shame people on sexual preference and honestly who doesn't like tall masculine African women.

    • by fermion ( 181285 )
      Who is not. It is like Walmart back in the day. Or Sears back back in the day. At some point they will fall to a company that out thinks them. Right now everyone who matters is getting rich
      • This isn't about someone else winning over them eventually. Someone will, that's certain. The problem is in that whoever over there wins, everyone down here loses.

      • I think it's interesting you mention Sears. Sears was the biggest catalogue company in the world when the world wide web (commercialized internet) first started. They had a mature and well run distribution system. They also had Wall Street type investors and traditional business types running them. People who generally get to where they are by who they know, and 'professional credentials', not imagination. If they had people with imagination, Amazon wouldn't have had a chance. Sears could have pivoted and o
  • I read some other articles and they're all equally vague on exactly what relief Washington DC is seeking from Amazon.
    My first guess was that somehow money is involved.
    My second guess is that it has something to do with the Washington Post and/or Bezos not pushing hard enough for DC to become a state, so this is a shakedown.

  • Is there a way we can make DC a part of Puerrrrto Rico?

"Money is the root of all money." -- the moving finger

Working...