Slashdot Mirror
Judge Rules Amazon Isn't Liable For Damages Caused By a Hoverboard It Sold (cnbc.com)
Earlier this week, a judge in Tennessee ruled that Amazon isn't liable for damages caused by a hoverboard that spontaneously exploded and burned down a family's house, even though they bought it on Amazon's website. "The plaintiff claimed that Amazon didn't properly warn her about the dangers they knew existed with the product, but the judge didn't agree," reports CNBC. At the time, hoverboards were all the rage; Amazon sold almost 250,000 of them over a 30-day period. The plaintiff claims the company had an obligation to warn customers properly about the dangers it knew existed. "[The plaintiff] bought the hoverboard on Amazon, the receipt came from Amazon, the box had an Amazon label and all the money was in Amazon's hands," adds CNBC. "[The plaintiff] has been unable to find the Chinese manufacturer of the device." From the report: It's the latest legal victory for Amazon, which has for years fended off litigation related to product quality and safety by arguing that, for a big and growing part of its business, it's just a marketplace. There are buyers on one end and sellers on the other -- the argument goes -- and Amazon connects them through a popular portal, facilitating the transaction with a sophisticated logistics system. The courts are reinforcing the power of Amazon's business model as the ultimate middleman. But for American consumers, there's growing cause for concern. [...] But if Amazon isn't liable when faulty products sold through its website cause personal injuries and property damage, customers are often left with no recourse. That's because it's frequently impossible for consumers to figure out who manufactured the defective product and hold that party responsible.
"[The plaintiff] has been unable to find the Chinese manufacturer of the device."
If Amazon can't put the buyer in contact with the company which produced the device, then they should be liable. They sold it, they should be responsible for it. Frankly, even if they can put the person in contact, they should still be responsible, and recovering damages from the supplier should be their problem.
We have consumer protection laws for a reason, and that reason is that not having them costs everyone money. This decision simply lets Amazon push the cost of doing business off onto the court system, which means We The People have to pay for their cost of doing business.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Bozos has got your money to dodge any of your stupid law suits.
Pathetic dad buys lame present that burns down house.
Just advise shoppers that they use the products Amazon sells at their own risk - with no guarantees, implied or otherwise.
Doing this would be similar to the "guarantees" we get on software.
How about that?
I do not think the issue is Amazon in this case: it is Chinese sellers and customer protection in a globalized world in general.
I had once bought a game key on Ebay and the Chinese seller refused to send it to me without me sending him a copy of my ID for age verification. Understandably, the last thing I want to do is sending some guy in China is the information on my ID. I asked for a refund and the seller refused, copy-pasting the same message about how I should give him a good review first. I contacted Ebay, then PayPal, none of whom wanted to help me with my issue despite the seller being marked with all of Ebay’s trusted symbols. The very young-sounding customer support person actually said that I “have the reigns in my hands and should threaten the seller with bad reviews until he refunds me”. I then reported the seller for “review extortion”, which is an offense under Ebay’s own terms of conduct, Ebay confirmed that review extortion had taken place and refused to help me with my refund.
At this point, I gave the Chinese bastard a snarky yet positively-marked review and he returned my money. I am confident that there is a library worth of similar stories that never made it into the court room due to being less high-profile. All of these companies are utter trash when it comes to third party seller customer protection.
"[The plaintiff] has been unable to find the Chinese manufacturer of the device."
If Amazon can't put the buyer in contact with the company which produced the device, then they should be liable. They sold it, they should be responsible for it. Frankly, even if they can put the person in contact, they should still be responsible, and recovering damages from the supplier should be their problem.
We have consumer protection laws for a reason, and that reason is that not having them costs everyone money. This decision simply lets Amazon push the cost of doing business off onto the court system, which means We The People have to pay for their cost of doing business.
So your entire underlying assumption is society is responsible for protecting someone who gets on the internet to find the cheapest piece of Chinesium crap from some seller engaged in Alibabatrage?
Ummm, WHY?!?!?!
You should buy two, one for each foot.
No one is responsible for anything, at any time, anywhere. No rules, no regulations, anything goes. You all remember voting for this, right?
They are NOT feckin' hoverboards!!!!!!!!
we're left putting our hopes in California. Man I wish the rest of the country could get with the program on consumer safety.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'm fairly certain that #1 is already in place, and my guess is that #2 is being contested by Amazon, that Amazon is claiming something to the effect that they're more like a postal service than a store. If I have that right, then I wholeheartedly side against Amazon in this case; whether or not they're "like" a store or a delivery service in a traditional sense, they're a new kind of entity and we need tech laws to keep up with new tech entities. I don't think Amazon should be required to do consumer device testing, but IF there is an available database (from a regulatory entity) documenting harm, Amazon absolutely should be required to present that information at the point of sale.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Seriously, Walmart/Target management are the ones behind having Chinese copy American patented goods. BUT, conservatives judges want to blame the manufacturer who was contacted by Walmart/Target to build such items.
In fact,the 7-9 manufacturers that work for these 2 companies are the ones that likely made the hoover boards, which were copies of an American company.
At what point do American companies get held responsible since the CHinese, and in general, all non-western companies, are not.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
If you don't know who made it or are uncomfortable with your ability to haul them in a court, don't buy the thing. Spend a little more on a reputable item...
They facilitated selling something called a "hoverboard" that doesn't hover...
... the piracy issue.
ISPs are the middle man, simply connecting content providers to consumers.
The owners of the IP have a hard time precisely identifying, and litigating, those on either end, so the effort turns to making the provider soak up the liability.
Shooting the messenger.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
In India, we have similar online middleman company, Flipkart. The company sells third party hardware on it's website. When the product is broken, no one is responsible. Flipkart says it is middleman who is responsible (seller here). Seller (another company- supplier, not manufacturer of original product) says it is not responsible as manufacturer is not responsible. When contacted, manufacturer says it is not responsible as it is the fault of any one and every one in the chain including dog outside purchaser's house.
For knowingly selling explosive liquids.
That's the logic used in this court case.
I'm sick and tired of all this "Both sides are bad" garbage.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If I buy faulty Tylenol, do I get to sue the store I bought it from? Why does it change when the company isn't reputable? Shouldn't you do you check into that before buying something? I know I check the brand or manufacturer of the things I buy, to hopefully avoid any issues. Those people did not, and since they couldn't, or wouldn't, find the manufacturer, thy went after Amazon.
Amazon is going out of its way to hide the origin of the seller. This is a problem not just for consumer protection, but also taxes and customs. At least here in Europe, it is quite difficult to see if the "seller" is actually operating from inside the EU or not. Some products are handled completely by Amazon, from Amazon warehouses and still without paying proper taxes or customs. I'm really looking for the day that some politician his/her genitals are still around and goes after this organized crime...
Like that time when my mother-in-law's Dodge pickup truck burned in front of my house, melting the asphalt after being parked for several minutes. In the end, neither the dealer, nor Chrysler owned up. The insurance covered the vehicle, and my mother-in-law had to pay to break the lease. We have never purchased a Chrysler product since.
We have dangerous garbage coming into the country by hundreds of container ships daily.
The products are produced by effectively untraceable and unregulated factories. They'll slap whatever safety marks they want on anything, it's all meaningless.
Their costs are incredibly low not just because of how poorly they treat their labor, but also how fast and loose all the designs and quality are.
I think raising their costs is a good thing. Sure it's a shame we can't get $40 patio sets and $0.25 plastic dog shit, but the net result will inevitably be higher quality products made by well treated domestic workers.
We need to move away from our unsustainable import practices and toward a self sustaining model that doesn't rely on everything we buy being disposable rubbish.
I can't stand Trump or 99/100 republican politicians, and I think these tariffs are based mostly shady benefits to their inner circles, but it has the potential to be a good move for the US.
Stop buying sketchy products from sketchy companies in China. This especially aggravates me because I hear all the anti-globalization nutjobs rave on and on when they frequently are the very ones who buy the most cheap junk from overseas. If you really want to bring jobs back to the USA, stop buying all that crap from China. Stop shopping at Walmart. And yes, it's gonna "hurt" you. You're going to have to suck it up and experience some discomfort and have less junk in your life.
And no you don't have to be perfect to make a difference. I recognize that there are some things that are impossible to get from USA manufs. But if everyone in the USA just started buying 20% less Chinese junk, I assure you, it would make a big difference.
(btw I'll add that if you're buying any food, pet food or other consumables made in China, or anywhere in Asia really, you are particularly taking a huge chance on your health or that of your pets. We have the FDA for a reason, because left to their own devices, manufs will absolutely put any garbage they please into food and medication. I mean for God's sake, they used to sell opium products as teething pain relief for babies.)
In Mexico the market sells tainted beer they could be held liable
Actually, I generally refuse to buy from Amazon at all, but I NEVER buy third party from Amazon. The first time I ordered a used book from Amazon, the money disappeared, but the book never showed up, and Amazon disavowed all responsibility. Since then I never buy third party goods from Amazon. If it's a new book, and the local book store can't order it for me, I order directly from the publisher. There have been 2 or 3 exceptions over the last decade. And the last thing I bought from Amazon that wasn't a book was a box of Penguin mints...nearly a decade ago now. Even then I was tending to avoid Amazon.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Approximately nobody wants to be a scooter that will burn their house down. Especially nobody wants their next door neighbor to buy one that ends up burning down your house too.
That's an entirely different thing from products that simply aren't well made, cheap Chinese products that break after a month of use. Sometimes I DO want a cheap product that I only need for a couple of uses. Market forces can more or less work for overall quality, though of course no system is perfect.
Consider also the difference between these:
1. You may not sell cheap stuff made in China.
2. If you sell dangerously defective things, you're responsible for injuries and damages your products cause.
There is a difference between the government deciding what you can and can't do vs the common-sense principle that you are responsible for the results of your actions.
Here buyers are suing in civil court to recover damages caused by Amazon selling dangerously defective goods. This isn't a criminal charge, the government putting people in jail for not doing what they are told. This is a private, consensual transaction - Amazon listed scooters for sale, the consumer paid Amazon for a fun scooter. Amazon instead delivered a fire bomb. The consumer asks that Amazon compensate them for the damage caused by the item Amazon sent them.
There's lots of cheap 3D printers that'll happily burn your house down. People on the forums know what parts are dangerous and how to fix them so they're LESS LIKELY to go up in flames but... recently it was noticed that actually most don't have basic firmware protection against runaway heating. Let's say your heating element falls off and gets drug around. Most printers won't detect this and will crank the heat up full blast since it can't read the temperature anymore. FWOOSH.
Yet you can buy these kits with no warnings or instructions how to make them safe. Yeah, amazon too. How many houses have to burn down before they do some basic safety checks in the products they sell?
Now it's even less than that.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
...what I already knew: Amazon is no better than eBay when it comes to costumer responsibility practices.
Just recently I read a post about fake SD cards still being a thing on Amazon, and this has been going on for the better part of the last decade, so it's quite obvious that Amazon simply doesn't care anymore.
But I've stopped buying on Amazon anyways back since they adopted an extremely aggressive tactic of pre-charging some 120~150% import tax for people living in my country. Brazil does have a very pricy import tax, but it's definitely not as high as Amazon is charging, and the only reason why they'd do something like that would be if they just don't want to bother dealing with our market anymore.
But that's fine... it forced me to look for alternatives, and I'm glad I did.
If you buy cheap shit, expect it to come with cheap shit problems. I blame the buyer for re-enforcing cheap shitty manufacturing in the first place for buying the product. If safety is a concern consider spending more money for a better quality product, and do not buy no name shit from China. IT ALWAYS ENDS BADLY.
This could have set a terrible precedent. The logic that concludes Amazon could be liable for selling, or facilitating the sale of, a product naturally concludes that a delivery company could be liable for delving it.
Pretty simple really, do your homework and know what you're buying, then shop price. Don't just search for the cheapest POS you can find in some broad category. There is good stuff and bad stuff out there, don't buy the bad stuff.
If you buy something, a question to ask is "who do I sue?". If you can't identify the party to sue, or they're not exactly reachable using the legal system, then maybe the small price may not be that good.
The usual approach is "meh, made in China" and throw it out and buy another one. But that's when things just die on you rather than explode and burn your house down.
If the local courts can't get to you, maybe you shouldn't be allowed to sell direct to the market. You should get an importer to handle the legals and take the heat. Bypass that and it's contraband.
"Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
A mom & pop would go broke from legal fees trying to scam consumers with dangerous off-brand Chinese crap, but Amazon is able to pool its resources and perform specific oppressive functions on a scale that would otherwise be unavailable in the marketplace.
If you buy a defective product from Target would you sue the cashier? No? But she took your money, she gave you the product, she's the seller... right? No? This is no different. Its just that the scale is different. Is the party store responsible if there is a mouse in your beer. No. Is a car dealer responsible for a manufacturers defect. No. Is your pharmacy responsible for a bad batch of viagra? No. The fact is we have a lot of people here operating off emotional biases, focusing their hate on the big bad company and ignoring the facts. If this family had bought the device at the little mom and pop store on the corner that's been there 60 years would the same people think they should lose their business, home and life savings? Are they prepared to give up their homes if they sell an item in a garage sale that breaks? But it's ok if it's the "bad" company. This is the same reasoning that convicts innocent minorities because, 'well they look like thugs they probably did something wrong'.
Don't buy shit from China.