Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Seems like a Faustian deal. 5K now so that amazon can use the data to put you out of business later.


sort by: page size:

Interesting play by amazon. Guessing this is a gov cloud type pr initiative so they don’t care if it loses money?

this has been going on for years. amazon benefits, so they allow the practice.

I wonder what this means for Amazon.

That's amazing. It's clearly a scam and it's been going on for almost 1 year. This really hurts Amazon's credibility and can't be good for them in the long-term. It doesn't seem rational at all.

It's absolutely a win for Amazon, who have been doing this for several years already, so their compliance costs are already baked in.

Not necessarily. They might be doing this to get more customers on it since they're losing to Datadog.

Amazon has a long history of being willing to eat a ton of loss to kill competition like in the very popular diapers.com business.


Out of curiosity, does anyone know what amazon's incentive is to do this?

Oh for fucks sake. This is what, Amazon’s third chance at the trough? At what point is it cheating?

Disclosure: long MSFT.


I don't see any benefits for Amazon as a whole of doing so.

If I’m reading commentary correctly, Amazon would invest in other companies using its Alexa fund in order to gain access to their data and then actively operate in a way that undermines the success of the company. Sounds like they’re essentially enjoying most of the benefits of purchasing a company but for a fraction of the price. Rather than spend their own capital to do the hard legwork of building and validating a product idea, they’re effectively spending others’ and then swooping in for the bait and switch kill.

If I were a founder or board member I’d be super skeptical about ever taking money from Amazon in light of this news.

If this isn’t illegal it at least seems wildly unethical. If it’s neither of those and considered an acceptable tactic, then perhaps companies are generally undervaluing themselves otherwise it wouldn't be financially feasible?


This has clearly been infringed on for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain; vis-a-vis, employment.

Amazon's monetary losses over this offense must be immeasurable. Jail time or crippling life-time debt could be the only satisfactory retribution.

/s


> Amazon's service was truly unlimited

It is not and never was. Check TOS

> 5.2 Suspension and Termination. Your rights under the Agreement will automatically terminate without notice if you fail to comply with its terms. We may terminate the Agreement or restrict, suspend, or terminate your use of the Services at our discretion without notice at any time, including if we determine that your use violates the Agreement, is improper, substantially exceeds or differs from normal use by other users, or otherwise involves fraud or misuse of the Services or harms our interests or those of another user of the Services. If your Service Plan is restricted, suspended, or terminated, you may be unable to access Your Files and you will not receive any refund of fees or any other compensation.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=...


That would make sense if it's the case, but in that case, is it really worth it for Amazon to give up that protection for the tens of millions of dollars at stake here? I would've thought they'd still prefer to pay that.

It looks like a polite reminder that this use violates Amazon's affiliate program rules, with the logical next step being revocation by Amazon.

Wow this is something where Amazon wants to kill a service for no apparent reason. Maybe to use the domain for their Alexa AI instead? Otherwise to restrict information on the internet.

Regardless of how this was calculated, it is a parking ticket to Amazon.

SlickDeals developed something similar but my understanding is that Amazon "asked" them to kill it or severely cripple it. Amazon's got a big stick and isn't afraid to weild it.l here.

Well, yes, and that's not some circumvention of measures like this, but the intent of these sorts of anti-competitive laws.

Amazon can use the same data they've been using all this time, but they must not put themselves in a special position in acquiring that data. If they want to publish their sales data for free or for a price that they themselves pay, that's fine, as long as others can also get the data.


This sort of thing should be illegal by federal law; I don't see anyone benefitting from it other than Amazon.
next

Legal | privacy