- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
FTC files “the big one,” a lawsuit alleging Amazon illegally maintains monopoly::FTC: Amazon “extracts enormous monopoly rents from everyone within its reach.”
You must log in or # to comment.
Oooh. Someone’s getting a 0.001% fine to continue business as usual. Juicy.
Everyone is so clever and so jaded. Please read the article:
“The lawsuit seeks declarations that Amazon’s conduct violates federal and state laws. It asks for an injunction prohibiting the conduct described in the lawsuit along with unspecified “structural relief” that would be “necessary to redress and prevent recurrence of Amazon’s violations of the law.” Structural relief could involve breaking up the company.”
Yeah, and history shows that “structural relief” is going to be a small fine.
The Dem appointees are trying to change things for the better. They may not be successful but I’m willing to wait and see, rather than cynically write off all chances today. It’s a mindset difference. Apathy and cynicism aren’t places I personally enjoy living.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Federal Trade Commission and 17 state attorneys general today sued Amazon, claiming the online retail giant illegally maintains monopoly power.
“Our complaint lays out how Amazon has used a set of punitive and coercive tactics to unlawfully maintain its monopolies,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said.
Today’s lawsuit seeks to hold Amazon to account for these monopolistic practices and restore the lost promise of free and fair competition."
Joining the FTC in the lawsuit are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.
The FTC claimed that “Amazon’s illegal, exclusionary conduct makes it impossible for competitors to gain a foothold,” and that the company “extracts enormous monopoly rents from everyone within its reach.”
If the FTC gets its way, the result would be fewer products to choose from, higher prices, slower deliveries for consumers, and reduced options for small businesses—the opposite of what antitrust law is designed to do," Amazon Global Public Policy & General Counsel David Zapolsky wrote.
The original article contains 613 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I can’t help but notice Amazon is facing a big lawsuit over hurting other corporations.
Selling an infinite catalogue of shoddy, fraudulent, and outright dangerous goods like leaden toys, phone-melting power-equipment, house-destroying incendiary batteries, and data-erasing empty data storage? No, that’s fine, that’s not Amazon’s fault, that was XZBBK’s fault. We kicked them off the store. No, I don’t think they’re related to that new company XBZZK, why would you say that? They sell legitimate USB cables that according to the listing used to be cutting board, a drying rack, a canopy for a kids bed, and an espresso machine.
