Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Is Kicking All Unauthorized Apple Refurbishers Off the Site (vice.com)

Posted by msmash on from the amazon-will-not-see-you-now dept.

In a new agreement between tech giants Amazon and Apple, shoppers will soon see a selection of the latest Apple products on Amazon.com. This is not good news for everyone. Motherboard: John Bumstead is a computer refurbisher who, every year, saves thousands of laptops from the shredder. He buys MacBooks en masse from electronics recyclers, fixes them, then sells them on Amazon Marketplace or wholesales them to vendors who do the same. Friday morning, Bumstead got an email from Amazon informing him that he'd no longer be allowed to sell Apple computers on the platform, thanks to a new agreement between Apple and Amazon that will only allow "authorized resellers" to sell Apple products.

"As part of a new agreement with Apple, we are working with a select group of authorized resellers to offer an expanded selection of Apple and Beats products, including new releases, in Amazon's stores," the email says. "You are receiving this message because you are currently selling, or have previously sold, Apple or Beats products. Your existing offers for those products will soon be removed from Amazon's online store in the United States. Please contact Apple if you would like to apply to become an authorized reseller on Amazon." As the email notes, this is part of a new agreement between two of the largest companies in the world that will allow Amazon to sell new Apple products around the world; in exchange, Amazon agreed to let Apple pick-and-choose who is allowed to sell Apple products on the site.

140 of 271 comments (clear)

  1. Hate monopolies by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is why we hate monopolies.

    In the internet sales business, Amazon has effectively become a monopoly.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Hate monopolies by BringsApples · · Score: 1, Insightful
      No.

      monopoly
      /mnäplE
      noun
      the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    2. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the internet sales business, Amazon has effectively become a monopoly.

      Oh, right, because there are NO other companies to buy from "in the internet sales business".

      None that anyone buys from. The mere existence of another store does not meet the minimum requirements for competition. There must also be a reasonable possibility of actually selling goods there.

      As a buyer, calling Amazon a monopoly is pretty accurate. Apart from a very small number of product-line-specific resellers that I buy from, the only other selling platform out there is eBay, which is basically only a last resort if I can't find what I want on Amazon. More to the point, not once have I bought anything on eBay merely because it was cheaper there. I don't even *start* looking at eBay unless Amazon has failed to provide the product. So at least for me, sellers that sell solely on eBay are not competing with Amazon in any meaningful way.

      But even that is not what makes this disconcerting. With this policy, Amazon is restricting not just new product sales, but also used product sales. After all, that's what a refurbished product is. Never before in the history of mankind have two companies with as much market power as Apple and Amazon colluded to destroy the used market for their products. Anyone who owns an Apple product should be very, very concerned, both with the realization that Apple wants them to be unable to sell their products when they want to upgrade and with the horrible net impact on the environment resulting from such policies.

      Shame on you, Apple. And shame on you, Amazon, for going along with it. I have never been more disappointed in Apple in all my life.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Hate monopolies by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More to the point, not once have I bought anything on eBay merely because it was cheaper there. I don't even *start* looking at eBay unless Amazon has failed to provide the product.

      So, what you are saying is, that you have SELF-SELECTED Amazon, and then have the temerity to call it a "Monopoly"?

      Right. Gotcha.

      Frankly, I have bought several used Apple products over the years, and not ONE of them have I ever even LOOKED at Amazon. They have all come from eBay. In fact, in my mind:

      1. Amazon = First place to check for New stuff.
      2. eBay = First place to check for Used stuff.

      And I would bet that 95% of all people feel exactly the same. In fact, I really didn't pay attention to the fact that there were whole businesses who sold Used stuff through Amazon.

      I think the only Used thing I ever bought through Amazon was an out-of-print Sci-Fi book I wanted to re-read. And, IIRC, that wasn't even a wonderful experience; they sent me the wrong book the first time...

    4. Re:Hate monopolies by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      What are you advocating for here, compulsory product listings from randoms who switch out fans and disks?

      This. Exactly This.

      Sounds like something the EU would impose.

    5. Re:Hate monopolies by alexo · · Score: 1

      This is why we hate monopolies.

      In the internet sales business, Amazon has effectively become a monopoly.

      *cough* AliExpress *cough*

    6. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      People are concerned indeed... but not in the direction you think. They are concerned about getting authorized refurb units, not from some fly-by-night yahoo selling unknown crap out of his basement.

      Uh, no. You don't understand the market. Apple sells refurb units of a given model for maybe a year, typically. These are mostly units that had serious problems right out of the box, during the period of high-volume sales shortly after the product comes out, that got replaced by Apple under warranty. After the first year, you typically do not see Apple selling that model in refurb form, because in the rare event that they have to replace one after the first year, the dud machine gets parted out and used to repair other people's machines.

      By contrast, nobody scraps a machine during that time period, because the products are under warranty, and even in the case of abuse, repair is still almost always going to be much cheaper than outright replacement. Therefore, these machines are almost invariably going to be from prior model years.

      Thus, the authorized Apple refurb market and the third-party refurb market are pretty much entirely non-overlapping. The former is a new, current-model product with a full Apple warranty, and the latter is a used product from a previous generation with a third-party warranty.

      People who buy used products don't care about Apple refurbs, because they are trying to save money, and you can't save enough money that way to really matter much. And people who don't buy used products won't buy the third-party refurbs, because they want the current model. Speaking as someone who has done both at different points in my life, your argument is nonsense.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    7. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      So, what you are saying is, that you have SELF-SELECTED Amazon, and then have the temerity to call it a "Monopoly"?

      What I am saying is that a very large percentage of consumers have self-selected Amazon as being the only trustworthy means of buying things from third-party sellers with adequate consumer protection, and that they in effect have no viable competition. More than 75% of online shoppers say that they shop at Amazon most of the time.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Hate monopolies by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      So, what you are saying is, that you have SELF-SELECTED Amazon, and then have the temerity to call it a "Monopoly"?

      What I am saying is that a very large percentage of consumers have self-selected Amazon as being the only trustworthy means of buying things from third-party sellers with adequate consumer protection, and that they in effect have no viable competition. More than 75% of online shoppers say that they shop at Amazon most of the time.

      When shopping for NEW STUFF online, I certainly shop mostly on Amazon, or at least look there first. But I would NEVER say that they have a MONOPOLY on Sales, or even Online Sales. Hell, every single retailer with more than 5 employees (and many with just 1 or 2!!!) have an ecommerce portal. There is absolutely NO way that anyone can say that either Amazon or Apple have ANY kind of a "Monopoly" here. No more than anyone can say eBay has a "Monopoly" on selling Used goods, even though I submit that most people look there either exclusively, or (as I do), first, when looking for USED stuff.

    9. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Still, even in the best case, there's still basically an Amazon-eBay duopoly. Most people never even see anything else. So in terms of sales volume, if you aren't on one of those or both, you're going to be in a world of hurt. And the bigger concern is that these sorts of agreements tend to be signs of things to come; there's nothing preventing Apple from entering into a similar agreement with eBay.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    10. Re:Hate monopolies by atrex · · Score: 1

      Newegg allows marketplace sellers these days as well (though I doubt they offer a "Fulfillment by Newegg" option similar to the "Fulfillment by Amazon" option offered to Amazon zSellers).

      Not that this isn't clearly still anti-competitive behavior. It was one thing when Amazon refused to carry Google products that were directly competing with it's own Fire products (although it was still kind of shitty of them to block third parties from selling them as well). But this is Amazon making a deal with another company, Apple, to muscle out the competition.

    11. Re:Hate monopolies by llamalad · · Score: 1

      I'm actually happy to see this.

      I was shopping for an iphone 6s a few months back and it was basically impossible to find a used one that I could be certain wasn't a half-assed refurb.

      Ended up getting one from what looked like a reliable seller and it was bizarre. It weighed less than a supposedly identical model that I'd purchased new some years ago, the screen was decidedly yellow, and the touch interface was somewhere between laggy and nonresponsive.

      Over th eyears I've bought a number of refurbished apple products directly from apple and have been satisfied with all of them.

      But it genuinely does damage Apple's brand to have unauthorized hacks slapping knock-off replacement bits in things and calling them 'refurbished'.

    12. Re:Hate monopolies by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      When a person claims that they usually start at Amazon when looking for used goods, it is implied that they do not normally even buy used goods, and when they thought about it, they actually bought something new instead.

      The only used market that Amazon has a major presence in is books.

    13. Re: Hate monopolies by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Hardly. I can go on overstock or ebay or any number of other places - even direct from Apple if I'm not mistaken - if I want a Macbook. That's not even close to a monopoly. And that guy can setup his own website if he wants and do it direct.

      If there's a monopoly in this story, it's Apple's monopoly on systems running OS X.

    14. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Not in the United States.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    15. Re:Hate monopolies by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      So because 3/4 of surveyed shoppers say that they shop at Amazon most of the time, that makes Amazon a monopoly? Do you read the shit that you type? So I guess Walmart is a monopoly in the brick-and-mortar space, too, right?

      Walmart makes up less than 10% of U.S. retail sales, and holding steady. Amazon is just shy of 50% of all e-commerce sales, and growing rapidly. The two aren't remotely comparable.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    16. Re: Hate monopolies by spinitch · · Score: 1

      Apple recycle reuse and repair programs in many countries designate a service provider such as Brightstar to collect and resell. Apples trade in program in various countries will direct web traffic To Brightstar, there are others. Presumably companies like Brightstar follows Apples rules but independent outfits harder to control. Apple desires to maintain a high customer satisfaction level and wants to deter shady business using roque parts etc.. Kind of heavy handed Amazon banning the independents vs labeling more clearly Non-Authorized. Apple also outsourced repairs and to help maintain quality sites availability they restrict over saturation by independents by limiting access to parts. This is not unique to Apple many companies do it. Good luck servicing your J Deere tractor etc... there are trade offs with either approach A) restrict more consistent quality B) Open cheaper but wide range of quality. If Apple allows independents to apply and qualify by meeting standards, vs their repair approach which does limit of supply, then Would support Amazon - Apple arrangement. Much like Uber you can be a driver if you meet quality of service and compliance requirements. Not a medallion scarcity type model.

    17. Re: Hate monopolies by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Apple recycle reuse and repair programs in many countries designate a service provider such as Brightstar to collect and resell. Apples trade in program in various countries will direct web traffic To Brightstar, there are others. Presumably companies like Brightstar follows Apples rules but independent outfits harder to control. Apple desires to maintain a high customer satisfaction level and wants to deter shady business using roque parts etc.. Kind of heavy handed Amazon banning the independents vs labeling more clearly Non-Authorized. Apple also outsourced repairs and to help maintain quality sites availability they restrict over saturation by independents by limiting access to parts. This is not unique to Apple many companies do it. Good luck servicing your J Deere tractor etc... there are trade offs with either approach A) restrict more consistent quality B) Open cheaper but wide range of quality. If Apple allows independents to apply and qualify by meeting standards, vs their repair approach which does limit of supply, then Would support Amazon - Apple arrangement. Much like Uber you can be a driver if you meet quality of service and compliance requirements. Not a medallion scarcity type model.

      Very Insightful AND Informative!

  2. Yet..... by Luthair · · Score: 1

    we see a lot of stories about how Amazon really doesn't care about people selling actual counterfeit goods on their platform.

    1. Re:Yet..... by swan5566 · · Score: 1

      Very true. Amazon is full of fraudulent aftermarket car performance chips, for example.

      --
      In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
    2. Re:Yet..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course they care. They care about whatever will make them the most money. Amazon and Apple are both known tightwads when it comes to b2b relationships, so it will be interesting to see who squeezes who most successfully as time goes on.

      I'm betting on Apple.

    3. Re:Yet..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where are they getting your product?

      If they're stealing it, then report that to the police.

      If you're selling it to someone, who then sells it to someone else, you get no say about that. Once you sell it to party 1, it is theirs, and they are able to sell it to party 2 if they want.

    4. Re:Yet..... by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hell, my employer loses 10s of thousands of dollars a month in fraud from people reselling our stuff on Amazon and Amazon refuses to do anything about it, even after we've told them repeatedly that our products are not authorized for sale on their site.

      Sounds like your employer's products are underpriced if resellers can make a profit reselling them on Amazon. Either that or you need to do better inventory control.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:Yet..... by Luthair · · Score: 1

      How is it "fraud" for people reselling your product? Are you saying the used good market, or even people selling legitimate products should not be allowed?

    6. Re:Yet..... by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      They have launched this type of program with other brands (Nike, I believe, is one of them). They limit it to specific brands though.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    7. Re:Yet..... by sexconker · · Score: 2

      How is that fraud?

      If they're MISREPRESENTING a product or the terms of sale, that's fraud and possibly trademark infringement.
      If they're STEALING your product to sell it, that's theft.
      If they're RESELLING your product, that's perfectly legal.

    8. Re:Yet..... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Hell, my employer loses 10s of thousands of dollars a month in fraud from people reselling our stuff on Amazon and Amazon refuses to do anything about it, even after we've told them repeatedly that our products are not authorized for sale on their site.

      I'm pretty sure the Doctrine of First Sale prevents your employer from prevailing in a lawsuit to stop that; so long as they don't misrepresent themselves as an Authorized Reseller or somesuch.

    9. Re:Yet..... by grahamsz · · Score: 1

      Amazon generally don't permit stuff that's being sold by an unauthorized reseller to be sold as "new". Particularly if the product's warranty only applies when bought through an authorized reseller.

      You can probably structure your agreements to allow you to deny warranty claims to customers who buy from those sellers. You wouldn't want to actually deny them because the reviews will reflect badly on you, but you can use that as a stick to get those amazon listing downgraded. Of course that's easier if you have authorized amazon sellers, i'm not sure how responsive amazon would be to cutting off the product altogether.

    10. Re:Yet..... by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      we see a lot of stories about how Amazon really doesn't care about people selling actual counterfeit goods on their platform.

      Since this story is about Amazon and Apple... At one time, Apple reportedly purchased 100 "original Apple" chargers from Amazon. Out of 100, NOT ONE "original Apple" charger was an original Apple charger, and 80 out of 100 were dangerous (according to Apple, who took them apart).

  3. In Soviet Amazon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Apple eats YOU

  4. RICO fodder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seems like (ought-to-be-unlawful) collusion to put paid to competition to me.

    1. Re:RICO fodder? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      So you're part of the "Amazon doesn't get to choose what gets sold on their web site" crowd then? Explain that one to me, please.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:RICO fodder? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Seems like (ought-to-be-unlawful) collusion to put paid to competition to me.

      That's because you're an idiot, like most ACs.

    3. Re:RICO fodder? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      RICO doesn't apply anywhere you come up with a theory that says a company had to have done some detail unlawfully.

      RICO applies to where the underlying basis for the business is unlawful; for example, if your whole business is giving out loans, and you're not registered as some kind of financial institution, and you're not reselling loans given out by a financial institution, then the underlying basis of your business is unlawful; "loan sharking" in that case. So that would be a potential RICO situation. Or another example, if your business consists primarily of offering gambling services that are illegal, then you're a "bookie" and there is a potential RICO situation.

      Now, lets say you're a internet reseller of used goods, and it turns out you're knowingly buying stolen goods and selling them. Generally that will not be RICO, because the business of selling used goods is a legit business. Even if you're only making a profit on the stolen items, and losing money on the legal items, it still isn't RICO.

      Or consider a laundry mat that is used to launder money. Is there really a laundry mat? If the business exists, it probably isn't RICO, merely run-of-the-mill money laundering. If the laundry mat doesn't actually exist though, it is just a lie on paper, now we're getting into potential RICO territory.

      The "cheat sheet" answer though is always: "It is never RICO." People shout RICO because they're upset at a real company; by definition it isn't RICO in those cases.

  5. Discriminatory, possibly illegal in some states? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Isn't this partially illegal in some states - amazon should be treated as some form of common carrier and maybe regulated if it's starting to pull sh*t like this?

  6. As if this will stop anything? by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, who amongst geeks or hardware hackers needs Amazon or official Apple Macbooks? Refurbished Macbooks are aplenty on ebay, as always. Similarly, macos Mojave works on cheap linux-using laptops in vmware with some tweaking.

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re:As if this will stop anything? by jythie · · Score: 2

      It does not matter to the seeker, it matters a great deal to the seller. For people trying to sell hardware, this represents a significant barrier to being found and purchased from. Which will also impact consumers since it will reduce competition in the resale space, meaning fewer options and those options will need to raise prices in order to keep things going.

    2. Re:As if this will stop anything? by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      Tomorrow:

      "You are receiving this message because you are currently selling, or have previously sold, Apple or Beats products. Your existing auctions for those products will soon be removed from eBay in the United States. Please contact Apple if you would like to apply to become an authorized reseller on eBay."

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:As if this will stop anything? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Except for all other online sales venues, such as Craigslist, eBay, Facebook, etc.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    4. Re:As if this will stop anything? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Well, except that eBay isn't trying to list new product direct from Apple, which is the crowbar that Apple used here. Want to sell shit direct from Apple, you have to abide by their draconian terms.

      eBay isn't interested, they'll let other people with Apple product list and be perfectly happy to take their taste of the final sale price.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    5. Re:As if this will stop anything? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      So, who amongst geeks or hardware hackers

      Geeks and Hardware hackers aren't the issue. Not from our ability to find stuff, nor from having any bearing at all on the discussion at hand given the ultimate size of our market.

    6. Re:As if this will stop anything? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      So, who amongst geeks or hardware hackers needs Amazon or official Apple Macbooks? Refurbished Macbooks are aplenty on ebay, as always. Similarly, macos Mojave works on cheap linux-using laptops in vmware with some tweaking.

      Um, putting macOS on a USED Apple computer is one thing; putting macOS on non-Apple Hardware is QUITE another.

    7. Re:As if this will stop anything? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      eBay isn't interested, they'll let other people with Apple product list and be perfectly happy to take their taste of the final sale price.

      ...and, considering how extraordinarily well Apple products retain their value, is probably perfectly fine with eBay, and their Sellers.

    8. Re:As if this will stop anything? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      eBay is interested, or it will be in the near future. Other retailers, such as Best Buy, have special accounts on eBay. Lookup an expensive HDD on Best Buy then find the one they're selling on eBay. You'll notice the standard seller details are missing where as every other listing has them. If you order that product, it'll come from Best Buy.

    9. Re:As if this will stop anything? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      It may be that very very few people choose Apple products, restrict their purchases to the single largest online Brandybrand(TM) store... and also are in the market for third party refurbished products.

      I'm sure there is such a mouse, and I'm sure he's stirring ferociously, but it isn't going to be a typical sort of combination of purchasing habits.

    10. Re:As if this will stop anything? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      In which case it's Best Buy that has the relationship with the disk manufacturer, and is using eBay as the storefront. That changes nothing. eBay is still just providing the connection with the buyer as well as payment services, for a percentage of the sale. And probably an additional fee for the "special" account.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  7. Re:Not a monopoly, a monopsony by BringsApples · · Score: 1

    No.
    There's Facebook, Craigslist, Ebay...

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  8. Selling new more profitable by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Allowing others to sell used/refurbished hardware is certainly less profitable than being allowed to sell new stuff yourself.

    1. Re:Selling new more profitable by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 1

      Because it would be Amazon would be making that 3-4% on new hardware, rather than a commission on the used/refurbished machines sold by others.

      And what if the agreement specified that Amazon got a bigger margin?

      Remember, Apple and Amazon haven't disclosed what the agreement says - just how it affects those that have not been anointed as holy enough by Apple.

    2. Re:Selling new more profitable by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You forgot to multiply by volume, and account for the level of demand.

  9. Re:It's not easy being green by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Pollute different.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  10. Re:No monopoly here. by neilo_1701D · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These refurbished are free to set up their own storefront and sell their product. No one is owed the traffic that Amazon provides.

    This is tantamount to a craft brewer complaining he can't put his beer in Walmart's aisle coolers.

    Not quite. Amazon has been pushing their platform for years as a safer alternative to eBay.

    To use your example, this is tantamount to a craft brewer complaining he suddenly can't put his beer in Walmart's aisle coolers after Walmart encouraged him to put them there for years.

  11. ... and the Walled Garden gets higher walls... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple reigns in the renegades.

    1. Re:... and the Walled Garden gets higher walls... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Rossman fixed a bent pin in about 10 seconds.

      Right.

      And how many people REALLY believe he just zeroed-in on the problem in 10 seconds, and wasn't told EXACTLY WHERE TO LOOK before the "Expose" was recorded?

      NOW who was being a lying cheat?

    2. Re:... and the Walled Garden gets higher walls... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Good. The more pain Apdows and Winple inflict on customers, the better for alternatives.

      I never bothered with Apple products because I resent their business model. I tolerate Windows to run AutoCAD etc but those installs live in VMs. Eventually that won't be necessary as Wine, Crossover etc catch up.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  12. Collusion... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Time for some trust-busting, Sherman Act style. Where's Theodore Roosevelt when we need him?

    1. Re:Collusion... by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      nonsense, there are plenty of places that guy can peddle refurbished apple gear, three big auction sites come to mind and others like him are there.

      non-news, so Amazon wants to be sure to sell supported products, that's fine

    2. Re:Collusion... by mustafap · · Score: 1

      >non-news, so Amazon wants to be sure to sell supported products, that's fine

      Bollocks. I just bought a CNC machine on Amazon where the seller explicitly offered and explained how to download a cracked software application to drive it. Amazon don't give a shit unless there is another big business love-in.

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    3. Re:Collusion... by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      not seeing your point. your seller is backing the mod.

  13. Re:No monopoly here. by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, a person can set up their own storefront, there will always be ways for dedicated customers to find a supplier. However, as a supplier who, I don't know, wants to make a living, this kind of power to cut you off 99% of the market is really devastating to people for whom it isn't a hobby.

  14. eBay for great MacBook Pros! by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    Getting a terrific lightly used MacBook Pro which is highly usable for 1/3rd the price of new is easy.

    Apple & Amazon's decision is just going to put more items on eBay and result in EVEN BETTER pricing.

  15. Re:Right of first sale ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Apple isn't telling you that you can sell something. Amazon is saying you can't sell on their platform.

    In summary, you are a moron.

  16. Re:Right of first sale ... by jythie · · Score: 1

    Neither Apple nor Amazon is making it illegal, they are just making an agreement between each other for Amazon to enforce Apple's reseller agreement. Since Amazon is a public company, it can sell or not sell whatever it pleases, thus there is no law forcing it to sell from any of the 'unauthorized' sellers.

  17. Damn! Came here to mention eBay, etc... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Sure got beaten to the punch on that one, but it kinda makes this a non-story, no? Once again, content providers aren't the problem. They're a dime a dozen.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  18. Sounds good! by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm quite pleased to see this. Apple playing games is only going to hurt them in the long run.

    So I'm very happy to see Apple tightening the screws on their gear, making it harder to get your hands on their garbage. Feed them all to the shredder, I say.

    Keep it up Apple, continue to be unfriendly to your customers, ratchet it up, keep pissing people off. It makes me delighted.

    1. Re:Sounds good! by mustafap · · Score: 1

      > not randoms who peddle repaired things out of the trash with unknown quality.

      You might be a redneck idiot but there are skilled engineers who care about maintaining electronics, who would like to make a small additional income. There, corrected that for you.

      --
      Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
    2. Re:Sounds good! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      amazon wants to sell things that are supported by manufacturer, not randoms

      If that was true, then why did it take years for Apple to force Amazon to do this, and why did they resist so long?

      I'm guessing that if you shop at Amazon, you probably type "Brandybrand(TM)" into the search instead "[type of item]" because how else would you avoid seeing hundreds of listing of the same items by random sellers?

    3. Re:Sounds good! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you must be an idiot who thinks they don't have a hundred ways to sell such things already, without Amazon.

      Amazon can choose its business partners, they have a right to do so, no one has to live by your juvenile ideas of everyone getting the same thing

    4. Re:Sounds good! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      it's called adapting while running a successful business

      who says Amazon resisted, their decisions are made by dollar value as they should be

      you butthurt juveniles are amusing

  19. Re:Not me by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    So...

    Apple sucks.
    Microsoft sucks.
    Linux sucks.
    iOS sucks.
    Android sucks.

    Are you guys still using an Amiga computer in 2018?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  20. Re: No monopoly here. by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    you clearly never bought anything from amazon.

    Anyway, All this does is kill apple off faster, since the result will be less people buying apple products, there will be less people to recommend apple products. typical vicious downward cycle of a company in the decline phase of the business cycle.

  21. Re:No monopoly here. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    Yeah, because brick and mortar stores never switch suppliers or change the product they carry. Are you serious?

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  22. Re:No monopoly here. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1, Troll

    Lots of people get by with this kind of thing on eBay and are quite happy to do so. I don't see eBay kicking off so-called "unauthorized" resellers, and they aren't exactly the small guy.

    Don't start quoting statistics that are wildly made up unless you want to look like an idiot. Amazon doesn't have the power to cut anyone off from 99% of anything, except maybe Amazon-exclusive customers (of which I'm sure there are incredibly few).

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  23. Re:No monopoly here. by infolation · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not quite... this is tantamount to a craft brewer complaining he suddenly can't put his beer in Walmart's aisle coolers after Walmart encouraged him to put them there for years.

    We're talking about the market for secondhand Apple computers. I suspect the market for secondhand beer is substantially smaller.

  24. Re:Doctrine of first sale is dead? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You buy a computer, sell it, and now Apple and Amazon say you can't resell it?

    No, you can still sell it. Apple & Amazon are saying you can't resell it on Amazon.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  25. Re:No monopoly here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's not what the first customers of the Apple 1 computer thought. And I would think those guys would be your heros, Apple Fanboi !!

  26. Re:Right of first sale ... by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Interstate trade, no less. Some Amazon and Apple assholes need to go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

  27. Monopolies are bad by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Except that there is no monopoly here. These refurbishers are still free to market their product on any other platform up to and including eBay.

    Except Amazon is now 49% of all online sales. That means, it's as big as all of the other retailers-- combined.

    At 49% they have considerable monopoly power. Not as much as 100%, a complete monopoly, but not negligible.

    Are you really saying that eBay is about to go under because Amazon?

    Unless somebody stops Amazon: yes.

    I'm pretty sure that Amazon gets to choose what products are listed in their store, just the same as any brick and mortar gets to choose what goes on their shelves.

    You may be "pretty sure," but if they have monopoly power, then no, they don't. Or, they shouldn't: that is what antitrust laws are about, and a monopoly making a deal to only sell one vendor's (more expensive) product is exactly why we have antitrust laws. Read some history.

    What are you advocating for here, compulsory product listings from randoms who switch out fans and disks?

    I am pointing out that monopolies are bad and destroy the free market.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Monopolies are bad by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      You may be "pretty sure," but if they have monopoly power, then no, they don't. Or, they shouldn't: that is what antitrust laws are about, and a monopoly making a deal to only sell one vendor's (more expensive) product is exactly why we have antitrust laws. Read some history.

      Are you REALLY that stupid?

    2. Re:Monopolies are bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Amazon is 49% of online sales but only 5% of all sales. Let that sink in, 5% of retail in the United States. Walmart controls more of the market and you think Amazon is the monopoly.

    3. Re:Monopolies are bad by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Why are you choosing the category "online sales" and not "sales," or "cell phone sales," or "online cell phone sales," or "online used cell phone sales?"

      If you're not even willing to be honest about which words are relevant, how are you ever going to manage to mount your high horse?

      Here, you're arguing with anybody else who is also against monopolies, because you want to defend hyperbole instead of exchanging opinions.

      This is a website for nerds. Nerds do care if what you say is actually true, not just if it sounded like you had Virtuous Feefees.

    4. Re:Monopolies are bad by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      I guess I'm wondering what you think that looks like. What is your proposed remedy for this "monopoly"? (it's not a monopoly, but you keep calling it one. A monopoly is defined as the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.)

      Is there all of a sudden going to be some government office that you can file a form with, and now Amazon has to use their logistics chain to sell your stuff, under penalty of fines or sanction? What happens when people start to flood Amazon with low quality bullshit that they aren't allowed to de-list without governmental sanctions? Who do you think in the US or EU government would have the authority to do this, under current laws? And how do you think it wouldn't be a total clusterfuck that makes the issue worse - your compulsory product listings literally hands more market share to Amazon by making it even easier to sell through them. And how is a government entity forcing a company to list and sell products they would rather not sell "the free market"?

      In conclusion:
      A. you haven't thought through this very much
      B. you don't understand what a monopoly is
      C. you don't understand what a free market is
      D. you don't really have any suggestions of how to fix the issue
      E. you don't have any legal framework or statute to stand on anyway.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  28. Re:Right of first sale ... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    It's legal under Right of First Sale because you have no guaranteed right to sell shit on Amazon.

    You're still welcome to sell it on eBay, Facebook, Craigslist, the local classified ads, to your neighbor, etc.

    Amazon has the right to list, or not list, anything they god damn want to on their store. What makes you think they should be compelled to list these refurb units? That's what you are advocating for here.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  29. Re:Not a monopoly, a monopsony by novakyu · · Score: 1

    In Amazon's case, "monopsony" is literally the wrong word. If it were a traditional retailer like Walmart, then, yes, you can make the argument that Walmart is "buying" from the suppliers (and then re-selling it to the consumers). The way Amazon works with people who don't have a negotiated relationship with them, they are literally not a buyer—they merely connect sellers to buyers as a middleman that takes a cut.

    P.S. The term "monopoly" makes sense, because they are providing a service. There is no way to read "monopsony" in a way that makes sense for Amazon's case.

  30. Re: No monopoly here. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    I buy from there all the time, both U.S. amazon.com and amazon.jp in Japan, what are you talking about? Been a customer for 18 years

    Apples customers that make them money don't buy used out of warranty things, this is irrelevant to Apple market that makes billions of dollars.

    Apple is profitable, outlook is good.

  31. How hard an ecommerce site today? by DogDude · · Score: 1

    How hard is it to do an ecommerce site today? What, does it take minutes to set up? And, is it really worth giving Amazon 30% of gross? Set up a website, and ignore Amazon. We do that, and we do just fine.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:How hard an ecommerce site today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Generating the traffic is the problem. With Amazon the traffic is there and directed.

  32. Ill just go elsewhere by Revek · · Score: 1

    I usually don't buy that type of thing from amazon anyway.

  33. Re:No monopoly here. by neilo_1701D · · Score: 2

    Not quite... this is tantamount to a craft brewer complaining he suddenly can't put his beer in Walmart's aisle coolers after Walmart encouraged him to put them there for years.

    We're talking about the market for secondhand Apple computers. I suspect the market for secondhand beer is substantially smaller.

    You're right: we're specifically talking about secondhand Apple computers. But the bigger picture is that Amazon specifically made a selling platform for people to sell anything. Heck; in TFA it says the guy ships his refurbs to an Amazon distribution facility to take advantage of their logistics. And so years after people set up these business, Amazon rips the entire thing from under their feet.

  34. Re:No monopoly here. by neilo_1701D · · Score: 4, Insightful

    there is no problem here, plenty of other places that guy can sell his things to those who like that stuff.

    Except there's not. Show me another online platform where a seller can ship a bulk load of good to a huge warehouse and have that platform take care of shipment and delivery. Amazon has a massive logistics infrastructure that sellers can take advantage of.

  35. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  36. Re:No monopoly here. by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is tantamount to a craft brewer complaining he can't put his beer in Walmart's aisle coolers.

    No.... this is tantamount to officials from your local flea market coming up to your permanent booth that you've been selling from for years informing you "We're going to have to close you down, because you've been selling reconditioned brand X products, and we've signed an exclusivity deal with brand X that only businesses authorized by brand X officials can sell brand X products at this market.".

    This SEEMS like Antitrust, because Amazon != Apple, and Amazon is in the business of allowing 3rd party sellers to sell pretty much any kind of product on their website, which only a few general exceptions.... this is Not normal like Walmart refusing to allow a 3rd party to stock goods in their store. The Amazon marketplace is more like eBay..... it would be like Apple signing a deal with eBay requiring eBay to remove/block listings for all Apple-branded products unless the seller is pre-approved with Apple as "permitted to sell".

    There goes.... not only all the legitimate used/refurbished equipment, But generic replacements for things like Macbook power adapters, non-Apple-OEM adapters, lightning cables, thunderbolt cables, etc.

  37. Re:No monopoly here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hold your horses right there. Amazon is a retailer's monopoly. Apple creates a monopoly in who can repair hardware and if the customer has a right to repair hardware independently. Now what they have is a collusion. This is called a cartel.

    You are so used to cronyism that you have been blinded by the money someone's paying you to write bad comments. Snap out of it.

  38. Re: No monopoly here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Strange..

    Both Apple and Amazon started in garages..

  39. right to repair issue! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    right to repair issue!

  40. Re:Right of first sale ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nor is there law which allows Apple to prevent people from selling their own property.

    Apple is not preventing you from selling your own property, so I have no clue what you are talking about.

    Amazon DOES NOT have to provide you a marketplace, however. That is up to Amazon, not you.

    You are free to sell your Apple, but Amazon has said they do not wish to do that for you. They are within their rights to do so, just like you don't have to sell someone else's product at your garage sale if you do not want.

  41. Amazon's no legal monopoly, but ... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I saw this kind of thing coming for years, on their platform. A long time ago, I used to do a lot of selling via the original "Amazon Auctions" service. It was more or less a direct eBay competitor, where any individual or business could start listing whatever used or new products they wanted to sell, with auction bidding.

    Then, that disappeared and all of us were herded to Amazon Marketplace instead -- a service that demanded you list your items for sale at fixed prices, but did help you determine the optimal sale price at least. (It would tell you if identical products were currently listed by other sellers, and if your price was below all of theirs or not. If you were willing to sell at the lowest price on the site, they'd promote your listing to people as such.)

    Then, I kept seeing Amazon revising the Marketplace, catering more and more towards big businesses and large volume sellers. You started having to create listings in kind of an inventory grid, that looked totally out of place for an individual selling a few items at a time as a side gig to make some extra cash.....

    Finally, they added so many rules and restrictions on sellers, it became unreasonable for the "little guy" to even bother with it. (Essentially, you got kicked off Amazon as a seller if you didn't agree to give any buyer a full refund for just about ANY reason. They could buy your product, switch it out with a defective/worn out and dirty version of the same one, and ship it back for a full refund claiming "Product was not as advertised." They could claim your perfectly good product was non-functional and get irate with you as soon as you tried to email them back to help them troubleshoot it. Again, you had to give them the refund and eat your original shipping costs to mail it to them. And if this nonsense went on a few times within a couple month period? Your percentage of satisfaction dropped to below their acceptable levels, even if you happily handed out all those refunds and lost money trying to sell your stuff. And you'd risk suspension for not keeping up your metrics.)

    Since then, they've been pedaling Chinese counterfeit versions of everything from shoes to iPhone chargers -- and only apologizing when someone like Apple catches them in the act, red-handed. Then, Amazon claims "We fixed the problem!" as they move on to the next high volume seller who wants to give it a try. So of COURSE they're gonna cater to Apple on this one. They don't want to get branded the bad guy....

  42. Restraint of Trade? by techdolphin · · Score: 1

    This sounda like restraint of trade. If I can meet Amazon's requirements, and I can show that I am an honest dealer, I should be able to sell on Amazon.

  43. Re:Right of first sale ... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

    What is so magical about a refurbished Mac that Amazon and Apple can legally collude to prevent the perfectly legal sale of a used machine?

    Nothing magical, but Amazon IS an authorized Apple reseller. If Amazon wants to continue to sell *new* Apple hardware, and Apple's reseller agreement says they can't sell refurbs, then they kinda have to play ball or else Apple will happily revoke their status and not ship new product to them.

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  44. Re:Doctrine of first sale is dead? by mustafap · · Score: 1

    >Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.

    The 1% already have power.

    --
    Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
  45. Re:Right of first sale ... by mustafap · · Score: 1

    What you say makes complete sense. Sadly, in the states, the people in power dont give a fuck.

    --
    Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
  46. Re:Discriminatory, possibly illegal in some states by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Isn't this partially illegal in some states - amazon should be treated as some form of common carrier and maybe regulated if it's starting to pull sh*t like this?

    Common Carrier?!?

    LOLOLOLOL!

    Boy, you Slashtards are D-U-M-B!!!

  47. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    How is this even legal under Right of First Sale?

    It is ultimately Amazon that has the "right" to pick and choose what they accept for sale. Apple has zero REAL control over that.

    And it is Apple's "right" to set any terms and conditions they wish with a prospective Authorized Reseller. Amazon doesn't HAVE to sell Apple's stuff.

    Dumbass.

  48. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Apple is telling Amazon to tell you what you can and cannot do.

    You're retarded. Did your Mother have you tested?

  49. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    This is literally an agreement in restraint of trade.
    It's a criminal violation of antitrust laws.
    You can't enter into an agreement that stipulates excluding a competitor as a term.

    Prove it.

    We'll wait...

  50. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Interstate trade, no less. Some Amazon and Apple assholes need to go to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

    And you need to go back to Junior High School Civics class.

  51. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Right of first sale says once it's your property, the original seller no longer has any say in who you sell it to. Apple can't demand you be a part of their reseller agreement when it comes to selling refurbished machines, because you're not a party to that agreement.

    Yet I bet you have argued that Apple is cheating Qualcomm out of "Royalties", based on a THIRD PARTY SALE of Qualcomm Components that were then RE-SOLD to Apple, right?

    Slashtards.

  52. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    It's not legal for amazon to do this. But not under the right of first sale, which while it does apply, doesn't require amazon to carry the product.
    This IS illegal under federal antitrust law, however. And Amazon ought to be sued tomorrow because this is a textbook violation.

    No it's not.

    Stupid shit.

  53. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    It's legal under Right of First Sale because you have no guaranteed right to sell shit on Amazon.

    You're still welcome to sell it on eBay, Facebook, Craigslist, the local classified ads, to your neighbor, etc.

    Amazon has the right to list, or not list, anything they god damn want to on their store. What makes you think they should be compelled to list these refurb units? That's what you are advocating for here.

    Exactly this.

    Too many Slashdotters have a really skewed notion of what "Free Trade" means. Not to mention "Democracy".

  54. Re:No monopoly here. by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

    Might extend that with e.g. "... as a result of an agreement with Anheuser Busch"

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
  55. Re:Right of first sale ... by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Please explain. Show your work. You're fucking wrong, as usual.

  56. Re:No monopoly here. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    there are plenty of shipping companies, what are you babbling about? They'll come right to the seller with a man in a little vehicle or a fleet of trucks depending on how much you want to ship

  57. Re:Pretty Funny! by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Slashdot readers who would never buy an Apple computer bitching about Amazon not selling certain Apple computers. How rich!

    SO true, LOL!!!

  58. Re: No monopoly here. by mSparks43 · · Score: 5, Informative

    what am i talking about?
    The fact you can buy tons of counterfeit goods from amazon
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/w...

    but now not legitimately refurbished apple products.

  59. Re:Not me by ledow · · Score: 1

    Apple sucks. I have never found a single redeeming feature in an Apple product (I manage hundreds, have never owned one personally in my entire life), software, hardware or "design". They are also fucking nasty to do business with (speaking for corporate, and education use).

    Microsoft... they're a bit nasty in business but they make decent things. Have you seen how ridiculously easy it is to set up a multi-user network with all kinds of features, replicated storage, hypervisors with failover, etc. etc.? If you think Microsoft "suck", then you've probably only owned their consumer stuff.

    Linux... I own a bunch of products. A RPi runs most of my entertainment (RetroPie + tvHeadend + Kodi). I ran a Linux desktop personally for nearly 10 years (while managing Windows networks... no Linux isn't "friendly" enough to do that simply for most places). I didn't suffer at all, and now I run Windows with VMWare (HyperV is good but it's not as good as VMWare for desktop usage), with Windows and Linux VMs inside it.

    iOS - sucks. See Apple.

    Android - not perfect but more than good enough for a consumer OS (proven by being one of the widest deployed consumer OS's ever). I wouldn't use it for a serious desktop machine, but it's fine for day-to-day-usage.

    But, Apple? Honestly? I can't find a single redeeming feature, or even a "first" that's actually down to them.

  60. Maybe Bootleg Chargers and Batteries will go too? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hopefully, Apple will continue to push on this, and get Amazon to stop selling all the shabby "Genuine Apple" Chargers that overvolt your laptop, Batteries that last 6 months, Adapters that are barely (or less) compatible (or just plain shoddy), cables that break, etc.

    That has gotten SO bad that I don't recommend anyone looking for those items to look on Amazon. It really is THAT bad.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/a...

  61. Re:No monopoly here. by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Amazon has a massive logistics infrastructure that sellers can take advantage of.

    And still do. Lots of people use Amazon Logistics. You can be someone to ship via Amazon but not sell anything via Amazon. You just ship your product to Amazon, and Amazon warehouses it and ships it. All you have to do is tell Amazon where to ship your item to.

    I've bought tons of stuff from eBay that were drop-shipped by Amazon in the end (complete with smile boxes). They didn't have Amazon on the label,

    The only thing happening here is that Amazon isn't letting refurbishers sell on Amazon. They're still free to use their logistics services.

    And yes, Amazon offers a full suite of services, including customs clearance for product. If it's new product, it needs to be palletized and labelled in a special way before Amazon will break it down into individual units.

  62. Ok, what about refurb or 3rd party parts? by rworne · · Score: 2

    The cynic in me also thinks that the brisk business of selling Apple or 3rd party replacement parts such as laptop screens as well as batteries and screens for iPhones is also going away, right?

    --
    I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  63. Cause Apple by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    Amazon was given a choice of having "unauthorized refrurbishers" or "first party Apple products". Not a hard choice. They still don't care, but Apple does and can throw it's weight around.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:Cause Apple by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

      This would seem to be a clear case of tortious interference.

      Apple is using their economic value to pressure Amazon into dropping third party sellers, thereby interfering in the business relationship between Amazon and the third party sellers, and causing measurable economic harm to the third party sellers by depriving them of the sales they would otherwise be expected to make via Amazon's platform.

      Tortious interference, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's business relationships with a third party causing economic harm.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
  64. Re:No monopoly here. by Aighearach · · Score: 2

    Anti-trust doesn't ban strategic partnerships, it mostly only bans price fixing; and even then only if it harms consumers.

    Exclusive deals like this require a monopoly to be problematic, but it also would require use of the monopoly to force the deal; if Amazon had a monopoly on cell phone sales, and they used that monopoly to force Apple to do something that restricted access or raised prices, then that would be an anti-trust violation.

    But Amazon doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on cell phone sales, and Apple is the one who wanted the deal! So it is not even close to problematic; no gray areas are even involved.

    And anyways, if the refurbs move to ebay, the prices won't likely change. Without a price increase, consumers were not harmed.

  65. Re:No monopoly here. by dk20 · · Score: 1

    They seem OK comingling inventory and releasing counterfit products

    I've been a victim of this as well:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Ninte...

  66. Re:No monopoly here. by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Informative

    called a cartel.

    The word you were looking for was "strategic partnership."

    A cartel is a horizontal partnership designed to fix prices or prevent access horizontally. Amazon is not a cell phone manufacturer, and this relationship doesn't change the prices of cell phones. It also doesn't prevent access by other cell phone manufacturers. So it isn't close to a cartel.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    A strategic partnership can be horizontal or vertical. Here, it is vertical; it is between the supplier of a good, and a retailer. While horizontal partnerships have to tread carefully around anti-trust law, vertical partnerships have very little exposure to that; they only have exposure when a monopoly is used to force some action that harms consumers by raising prices. Amazon is not a monopoly of any market, they're only a market leader; and here they're not using their position to force Apple to do anything. It is the opposite; Apple is such a big presence in the cell phone market that they finally were able to get Amazon to do what they wanted!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    As long as the cell phone carriers are all selling phones directly to customers, and most cell phones are being sold that way, claiming some sort of "monopoly" by a retailer would get laughed out of court.

  67. Re:Discriminatory, possibly illegal in some states by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    I don't think the concept of "partially illegal" would survive both the 10th and 14th Amendments.

  68. Re:Right of first sale ... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    Haven't you figured out by now; it is aliterate. It can read, but it won't.

    What makes you think it could take a class, and learn something?

  69. Re:Right of first sale ... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    Too many Slashdotters have a really skewed notion of what "Free Trade" means. Not to mention "Democracy".

    Buttbuttbutt they TUK eR JERBS! er JERBS! Whatabutt r FREEZE PEACH they tuk er FREEZE PEACH!

  70. Re:Right of first sale ... by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    It is almost as if Apple cell phones are not fungible, and Apple controls a monopoly on them!

    Totally legal, that; a natural monopoly caused by market preferences.

    If the whiners were smarter, they'd complain about that side. I mean, it is still a failing argument, but at least it is less stupid than "Amazon has a monopoly on used electronics. x.X"

  71. Re:Not me by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    I have never found a single redeeming feature in an Apple product

    Apple ProDOS had a feature where you could hit a keyboard combo and drop into an ASM REPL for debugging.

    You don't even need debugging symbols when you have that! Or you don't get to have them. Something like that. But it was pretty freakin' awesome.

  72. Re: No monopoly here. by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    Apple started out selling illegal blue boxes to foreign exchange college students that allowed them to make free international long distance calls. Selling tone generator boxes used to steal from the phone company. That was what got Jobs and Wozniak in the hardware selling business, and part of what funded the start of Apple.

  73. Same old same old by nagora · · Score: 1

    http://web.ku.edu/~eceurope/hi...

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  74. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Haven't you figured out by now; it is aliterate. It can read, but it won't.

    What makes you think it could take a class, and learn something?

    I like the term "aliterate"!

  75. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Too many Slashdotters have a really skewed notion of what "Free Trade" means. Not to mention "Democracy".

    Buttbuttbutt they TUK eR JERBS! er JERBS! Whatabutt r FREEZE PEACH they tuk er FREEZE PEACH!

    Yes, that movie is even more true today... Sigh!

  76. Sell them as a PC? by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 1

    Put an easily removable label over the Apple logo and sell them as a Crabapple PC?

    --
    No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
  77. Re:Maybe Bootleg Chargers and Batteries will go to by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    Yeah I've been procrastinating on making it to the hardware store for some button cells... could buy them on Amazon but half a chance they'll be dead or counterfeit these days.

  78. Re:No monopoly here. by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

    Amazon sells lots of things billed as "refurbished" and most of them are not refurbished by the manufacturer.

    This case deals with their refusing to sell non-Apple-authorized refurbished Apple products, and only that.

  79. Re:Right of first sale ... by shentino · · Score: 1

    It is bullshit, but they don't have to use trademark or copyright law to stop it.

    Amazon is a private business and has the right to do what it darn pleases within the bounds of the law.

    No, Apple can't make Amazon stop selling refurbished macs. They can, however, ask, and Amazon can say yes.

  80. Will ultimately hurt Amazon by Chissblue · · Score: 1

    This is great news for good old fashioned small businesses that don't like to operate under Amazon and prefer sales direct on their website. Besides isn't NewEgg the place to buy refurbished electronics? Amazon would only deliver the laptop in a thin bubble wrapped envelope dropped onto the concrete in front of your home.

  81. Re:Right of first sale ... by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Ha! "Right of Contract"! That sure got MS out of hot water! Intel, too!

    You fucking clown. You have no clue about anything.

  82. Re:Right of first sale ... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Ha! "Right of Contract"! That sure got MS out of hot water! Intel, too!

    You fucking clown. You have no clue about anything.

    Hmmmm.

    If you admit that the common-law "Right of Contract" was a successful legal defense, then I guess I DO have a clue, at least about SOMETHING...

    But if you were being sarcastic, then I'd like to see a reference about why that defense failed for MS or Intel.

  83. Re: No monopoly here. by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    Woz and Jobs got started in business producing devices for sale by selling Blue boxes. That they later decided on the name Apple Computer when they started making the Apple 1 means they then adopted that as a company name.

    In a strict legal sense they were separate entities. In the sense of getting a start producing and selling gadgets the Woz/Jobs duo started out selling blue boxes.

    They couldn't very well put a brand name on their Blue Boxes even though they had a thriving business making and selling them, so technically they weren't a 'company.' They were contraband devices, which was why it was lucrative to build and sell them.