Amazon Notorious Markets
Amazon Defective Products
Amazon Notorious Markets - A Company That Facilitates Illegal Counterfeits and Piracy
Did Jeff Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon,
lie under oath to the United States Congress? Let’s find out!
lie under oath to the United States Congress? Let’s find out!
Is Amazon a "Criminal Enterprise" disguised as an e-commerce shopping website to take advantage of the general populace by "Price Fixing" for the express purpose of driving the competition out of business so Amazon will then have a true monopoly so huge that they can increase their prices exponentially at will when the consumer has very few other choices of where to purchase their goods?
The United States Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, needed to chastize Jeff Bezos personally, along with Amazon the company, for numerous inappropriate transgressions and potential illegal activities time and time again of which most of the letters sent to them regarding their unethical behavior are contained within this website. It appears that neither Jeff Bezos nor any of the other Amazon executives are able to comprehend the gravity of their misdeeds and how those actions negatively impact their loyal customers and their dedicated employees.
If this organization can’t get their act together and discontinue their abhorrent behavior then maybe it’s time that Congress creates significant restraints and severely limit their ability to partake in activities that harm others.
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.
The United States Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, needed to chastize Jeff Bezos personally, along with Amazon the company, for numerous inappropriate transgressions and potential illegal activities time and time again of which most of the letters sent to them regarding their unethical behavior are contained within this website. It appears that neither Jeff Bezos nor any of the other Amazon executives are able to comprehend the gravity of their misdeeds and how those actions negatively impact their loyal customers and their dedicated employees.
If this organization can’t get their act together and discontinue their abhorrent behavior then maybe it’s time that Congress creates significant restraints and severely limit their ability to partake in activities that harm others.
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.
More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries back 'Make Amazon Pay' campaign
LONDON, Dec 3, 2020 (Reuters) - More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries have signed a letter to Amazon.com Inc boss Jeff Bezos backing a campaign that claims the tech giant has “dodged and dismissed … debts to workers, societies, and the planet,” organisers said.
The “Make Amazon Pay” campaign was launched on Nov. 27 - the annual Black Friday shopping bonanza - by a coalition of over 50 organisations, with demands including improvements to working conditions and full tax transparency.
The letter’s signatories include U.S. Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, former UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and Vice President of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala, co-convenors Progressive International and UNI Global Union said.
“We urge you to act decisively to change your policies and priorities to do right by your workers, their communities, and our planet,” the letter said.
“We stand ready to act in our respective legislatures to support the movement that is growing around the world to Make Amazon Pay.”
Amazon, the world’s biggest retailer, has faced criticism for its tax practices before, including in the UK and the EU. It says its profits remain low given retail is a highly competitive, low margin business and it invests heavily.
It said on Thursday that while it accepted scrutiny from policymakers, many of the matters raised in the letter stemmed from misleading assertions.
“Amazon has a strong track record of supporting our employees, our customers, and our communities, including providing safe working conditions, competitive wages and great benefits,” it said, adding it was “paying billions of dollars in taxes globally.”
Amazon grew rapidly during the pandemic, with sales soaring as restrictions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus closed bricks-and-mortar shops and sent consumers online.
Governments worldwide are considering tougher rules for big tech to assuage worries about competition.
The European Union, for example, last month charged Amazon with damaging retail competition, alleging it used its size, power and data to gain an unfair advantage over smaller merchants that sell on its online platform.
Amazon disagreed with the EU assertions, saying it represented less than 1% of the global retail market and there were larger retailers in every country in which it operated.
LONDON, Dec 3, 2020 (Reuters) - More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries have signed a letter to Amazon.com Inc boss Jeff Bezos backing a campaign that claims the tech giant has “dodged and dismissed … debts to workers, societies, and the planet,” organisers said.
The “Make Amazon Pay” campaign was launched on Nov. 27 - the annual Black Friday shopping bonanza - by a coalition of over 50 organisations, with demands including improvements to working conditions and full tax transparency.
The letter’s signatories include U.S. Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, former UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and Vice President of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala, co-convenors Progressive International and UNI Global Union said.
“We urge you to act decisively to change your policies and priorities to do right by your workers, their communities, and our planet,” the letter said.
“We stand ready to act in our respective legislatures to support the movement that is growing around the world to Make Amazon Pay.”
Amazon, the world’s biggest retailer, has faced criticism for its tax practices before, including in the UK and the EU. It says its profits remain low given retail is a highly competitive, low margin business and it invests heavily.
It said on Thursday that while it accepted scrutiny from policymakers, many of the matters raised in the letter stemmed from misleading assertions.
“Amazon has a strong track record of supporting our employees, our customers, and our communities, including providing safe working conditions, competitive wages and great benefits,” it said, adding it was “paying billions of dollars in taxes globally.”
Amazon grew rapidly during the pandemic, with sales soaring as restrictions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus closed bricks-and-mortar shops and sent consumers online.
Governments worldwide are considering tougher rules for big tech to assuage worries about competition.
The European Union, for example, last month charged Amazon with damaging retail competition, alleging it used its size, power and data to gain an unfair advantage over smaller merchants that sell on its online platform.
Amazon disagreed with the EU assertions, saying it represented less than 1% of the global retail market and there were larger retailers in every country in which it operated.
Jeff Bezos admits 'stolen and counterfeit goods' are being sold on Amazon!
No one should be above the law, not even Jeff Bezos, common thieves deal in 'stolen goods' and when found guilty in a court of law they are sentenced to prison, Jeff Bezos should be no different!
Jeff Bezos admitted emphatically that he knowingly allowed Amazon to sell 'stolen goods' which is also know as stolen property, stolen merchandise etc. and he should be held accountable and forced to face a criminal trial jury of his peers. If found guilty, it would be extremely difficult to render any other verdict, as he testified under oath to Congress and that Congressional Hearing was televised and viewed by millions of people around the world that Amazon sells 'stolen goods'.
Amazon, by Jeff Bezos' testimony, has over a million third-party sellers so it would be reasonable to conclude even a minescule percentage could amount to tens of thousands of 'stolen goods' would be handled by Amazon and therefore the penalty for each individual infraction could conceivably bring about several years in prison and then multiplied by the massive number of sales of 'stolen goods' could amount to a lifetime behind bars, and the evidence of his direct and irrefutable testimony would cause his conviction without the need for any witnesses. And to even magnify this each act of selling 'stolen goods' is the direct result of receiving 'stolen goods', another set of felonies for each. Jeff Bezos, if convicted, may never see the light of day beyond his prison walls. Amazon did nothing to investigate and vet these sellers to determine for themselves that none of this property was stolen or counterfeit so he deserves whatever sentence the various juries decide. Had Amazon conducted sufficient due diligence instead of just being focused on the almighty dollar they could have easily prevented this criminal action of receiving and selling 'stolen goods'.
All of the District Attorneys and Attorneys General in every jurisdiction throughout the United States could prosecute Jeff Bezos and in addition to prison incarceration could quite possibly enforce Billions of Dollars in fines and court costs which very well may reduce Jeff Bezos from being the richest man in the world to just your average every day common felon criminal. Daunting thought to say the least. Jeff Bezos may receive his come uppings and he has no one else to blame except himself for being so greedy as to knowingly sell 'stolen goods'.
In August 2019 the FBI uncovered a theft ring in Seattle, where Amazon is headquartered, that sold millions of dollars' of 'stolen goods' on Amazon.com in just the past 6 years FBI agent Ariana Kroshinsky wrote in her affidavit.
The guilty must face the consequences of their actions and Jeff Bezos must be held to the same legal standards that all Americans agree to live by and he may have become a multi billionaire because he engaged in selling 'stolen goods' where the great majority of Americans walk the narrow path of honesty instead of criminal activity and apparently Jeff Bezos chose the easy road with impunity!
Approximately 145 Million people around the globe subscribe to Amazon's "Prime" accounts and pay billions of dollars for the privelege believing that Amazon would act in their best interest and never sell them any counterfeit, dangerous, defective or 'stolen goods' and because Amazon deceived them they at the very least should have the entirety of their costs refunded to them which would most likely amount to BILLIONS of dollars which would then affect the income to Amazon being decreased exponentially and subsequently reduce the stock value accordingly. Amazon would be required to file documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission of these 'material facts'.
There is another possible smoking gun regarding how Amazon conducts their respective businesses and that is their "Terms of Service". If their "Terms of Service" are worded in a specific way with the intent to deceive as mentioned above then quite possibly it could be construed in a court of law that it is a "Scheme or Artifice to Defraud" in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1346 which could eliminate it from their business entirely by making it invalid and unenforceable in every aspect. This would open up a whole new legal quandary for Amazon should the courts decide to deem their "Terms of Service" unenforceable.
Most major corporations have a 'morals clause' as part of their employee contracts which should include all executives and members of the Board of Directors, wherein if any of them violate it they should be terminated for committing or allowing knowingly criminal acts such as multiple felonies. It would be difficult, if not impossible to claim 'plausible deniability' since the CEO Jeff Bezos admitted under oath his direct knowledge of Amazon engaging in the selling of 'stolen goods'.
Another gleaming aspect of this criminal behavior within Amazon's hierarchy is that in the commission of this very serious crime situation is that the law requires what is referred to as "Clawback" which details that all money generated in the act of committing a Felony the proceeds can be confiscated and/or forfeited to the respective governmental agencies having jurisdiction.
In the case with Jeff Bezos, if found guilty, his multiple million dollar personal acquisitions such as his mansions in Beverly Hills and Washington D.C. and the newspaper Washington Post etc. should also be forfeited as the benefits gained from illegal activity selling 'stolen goods.'
At the risk of being redundant, no one should be above the law which would include Jeff Bezos and when prosecuted finalized and established that he is guilty his forfeitures should amount to several Billion dollars. He was aware of his crimes and did nothing to prevent it and therefore 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime". We reap exactly what we sow, including the richest man in the world.
The numerous law enforcement agencies who have jurisdiction of the crimes locations, which might be all 50 states, should prosecute every high ranking executive within Amazon including but not limited to CEO Jeff Bezos to the fullest extent of the law and sentence them to the maximum number of years possible to set an example that literally no one is above the law and thus these severe penalties will be a deterrant to any other corporate execs to refrain from engaging is such egergious activities against their fellow man!
There may be other foreign entities such as Canada, the European Union, Great Britain, Ireland among numerous others that want to initiate their own legal proceedings against Amazon, Jeff Bezos along with additional senior executives who participated and allowed the crime of selling 'stolen goods' to have their day in court.
Jeff Bezos may come to 'Rue the Day' that he admitted under oath to selling 'stolen goods'!
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020, the world's richest man, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, testified under oath before the United States Congress answering questions regarding his company's anti-competitive behavior.
During the five-hour-long Q&A session Jeff Bezos was hit with a wide array of questions about topics ranging from Amazon's controversial use of third-party seller data to turning a blind eye to counterfeit products and selling 'stolen goods'.
Being the founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos is acutely aware of literally all that happens within his Amazon empire as he would be the most knowledgeable regarding the inner workings of his own company which is precisely how he became the richest man in the entire world.
David Cicilline, the chair of the House of Representative's Antitrust subcommittee who was leading the investigation into Amazon's stated "As CEO and founder of the company, (Jeff Bezos) must be accountable for Amazon's record of dishonesty before Congress", and "In light of the gravity of this situation, I am also considering whether a perjury referral is warranted".
Congress also said that the company statements "appear to be misleading, and possibly criminally false or perjurious".
For example, when Rep. Pramila Jayapal asked him whether Amazon ever used third-party seller data to create competing products under its own label, Bezos dodged that direct and specific question by replying "I can't answer yes or no to that question".
"We have a policy against using seller-specific data to aid our private-label business", he added, "But I can't guarantee you that that policy has never been violated". Jeff Bezos knows full well what takes place at Amazon, he answered in that verbiage to cover himself and not be found guilty of perjury.
Pressed to address allegations of Amazon's data appropriation exposed in a Wall Street Journal investigation in April, Bezos said he didn't know the specifics yet. "We continue to look into that very carefully".
In a separate exchange later in the hearing, Congresswoman Rep. Lucy McBath of Georgia asked Bezos whether Amazon has allowed 'stolen goods' to be sold on its platform. Rep. McBath asked Jeff Bezos, "Are 'stolen goods' sold on Amazon? To which Bezos replied, "Congresswoman, not to my knowledge". This response was absolute perjury to the United States Congress because Jeff Bezos was acutely aware of the August 2019 FBI investigation of the $10 Million dollar theft ring that sold 'stolen goods' on Amazon!
Asked more than once Jeff Bezos eventually admitted under oath that yes, Amazon does indeed sell 'stolen goods' by stating among other things that "There are more than one million sellers on Amazon. I'm sure there have been 'stolen goods' sold on Amazon".
Rep. McBath asked point blank again, "So basically Mr. Bezos that means you are saying YES?" To which Bezos finally responded, "I GUESS SO".
Pressed further by Rep. McBath on the subject of selling 'stolen goods', Jeff Bezos stated "I don't think it's a large part of what we are doing". Are you kidding Jeff Bezos, NOT A LARGE PART OF WHAT WE ARE DOING! You act as if it's no big deal but definitely something that brings in lots of income so we just close our eyes and let the money flow in from our 'stolen goods' business!
Mr. Bezos, 'Go straight to jail, do not pass go, do not collect the $200, just like the play monopoly game'! It appears to you that selling 'stolen goods' is something you take for granted and enjoy since it's part and parcel of what made you into a Billionaire and the richest man in the world. You mock the hard working honest people of America and you shold be ashamed of yourself...
Law enforcement can't ignore your blatant refusal to police your own company and eliminate once and for all the criminal behavior of selling 'stolen goods' etc. and they should proscecute you Jeff Bezos just like any street criminal who robs a liquor store for a couple hundred dollars. Not only does selling Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods' hurt the consumer but cause the prices of everything any legitimate business sells to try and offset what you do on what could possibly be an every day occurance.
Every individual engaged in Law Enforcement in the United States has sworn a sacred oath to "Defend the Constitution Against All Enemies Foreign and Domestic' and to uphold the law equally regardless of who may be the criminal so they must investigate and proscecute every perpetrator including Jeff Bezos as he is an 'admitted criminal' against his own customers.
Selling 'stolen goods' is a FELONY! Receiving 'stolen goods' is also a FELONY!
Since a vast number of third-party sellers ship their goods to be sold in the 'Fulfillment by Amazon' (FBA) and Amazon then receives and stores their products within Amazon's warehouses (fulfillment centers) and then the Amazon advertises the various products for sale, uses Amazon's payment methods, and then will pick, pack and ship them in Amazon packaging to the purchasers.
A California Appeals court ruled last April that Amazon was indeed the seller of record to Angela Bolger since Amazon's activities basically conducted the entire transaction from beginning to end even though they did not manufacture the defective product and harmed Bolger severely.
In respect with 'stolen goods' Amazon receives them from the third party sellers which means Amazon is committing numerous FELONIES by becoming the recipient of 'stolen property' and then selling/delivering 'stolen goods' with the full and complete knowledge of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos as verified by his sworn testimony before the United States Congress, can't be more substantiated proof than that! GUILTY!!!
Congress has demanded that Amazon discontinue selling 'Stolen Goods', Counterfeit, Illegal, Deadly and Deceptive Products.
There may be another possibility why sellers have chosen Amazon as their partner in crime and that is it would be the perfect mechanism to carry out 'money laundering', meaning taking the dirty money obtained via 'stolen goods' being sold at will on Amazon and then cleaning that same sales money, which is a 'Prime" method, and hopefully undetectable to Amazon since Amazon nor Jeff Bezos has been able to stem the tide of long term 'stolen goods' from being overwhelming sold on Amazon.
If Amazon has become too large and unwieldy then maybe the Federal Government should force Amazon into a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy which could then install one of their Bankruptcy Court Trustees to oversee and run the company since it appears that Jeff Bezos does not possess the necessary control capabilities to prevent and eliminate the proliferation of receiving and selling Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective and Illegal 'Stolen Goods' from their platform.
The United States Congress should subpoena every single sales document of Amazon for at least the past 10 years to establish exactly how many transactions contained any Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods' took place and reverse those illegal sales and return the entire purchase price to the consumer victims who was deceived.
California Penal Code Section § 496 - Receiving Stolen Property
Property is stolen if it was obtained by any type of theft, or by burglary or robbery. Theft includes obtaining property by larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, or trick.
To receive property means to take possession and control of it. Two or more people can possess the property at the same time.
A person does not have to actually hold or touch something to possess it. It is enough if the person has control over it either personally or through another person.
When Amazon third-party sellers deliver 'stolen goods' to an Amazon Fulfillment Center for resale and delivery the Amazon company is then the recipient of 'stolen property' based upon the California Penal Code Section § 496, they are part and parcel of the actual act.
California Penal Code section § 496, subdivision (a) (section 496(a)) makes receiving or buying property “that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft” a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment. Section § 496, subdivision (c) (section 496(c)) provides that any person “who has been injured by a violation of (section 496(a) may bring an action for three times the amount of actual damages, if any, sustained by the plaintiff, costs of suit, and reasonable attorney's fees.”
Plaintiffs contends, based on the statutory language, a criminal conviction under section 496(a) is not a prerequisite to recovery of treble damages under section 496(c). Plaintiff asserts that the phrase “any manner constituting theft” under section 496(a) includes theft by false pretense.
Leading buyers of Amazon products without disclosing that they may be 'counterfeit, damaged, deadly, defective, illegal, and/or 'stolen goods' is tantamount to selling via false pretenses and therefore may be considered the crime of theft by false pretense under California Penal Code Section § 496.
Receiving Stolen Property (Penal Code, § 496(a)). (“(Property is stolen if it was obtained by any type of theft, or by burglary or robbery. (Theft includes obtaining property by larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, or trick.))”)
Theft by False Pretense, Larceny by Trickery, Unjust Inrichment (Price Gouging During the Coronavirus Pandemic Emergency), Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith are a few more that need to be investigated in the proocess of selling and receiving 'stolen goods' as they pertain to Amazon not disclosing these facts to potential buyers of the Counterfeit, Dangerous, Deadly, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods'.
California Penal Code § 532 (a) Every person who knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defrauds any other person of money, labor, or property, whether real or personal, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character, and by thus imposing upon any person obtains credit, and thereby fraudulently gets possession of money or property, or obtains the labor or service of another, is punishable in the same manner and to the same extent as for larceny of the money or property so obtained.
California Penal Code § 484 Larceny (a) Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him or her, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person, obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft.
California Penal Code § 396 (a) The Legislature hereby finds that during a state of emergency or local emergency, including, but not limited to, an earthquake, flood, fire, riot, storm, drought, plant or animal infestation or disease, pandemic or epidemic disease outbreak, or other natural or manmade disaster, some merchants have taken unfair advantage of consumers by greatly increasing prices for essential consumer goods and services. While the pricing of consumer goods and services is generally best left to the marketplace under ordinary conditions, when a declared state of emergency or local emergency results in abnormal disruptions of the market, the public interest requires that excessive and unjustified increases in the prices of essential consumer goods and services be prohibited. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to protect citizens from excessive and unjustified increases in the prices charged during or shortly after a declared state of emergency or local emergency for goods and services that are vital and necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of consumers, whether those goods and services are offered or sold in person, in stores, or online. Further, it is the intent of the Legislature that this section be liberally construed so that its beneficial purposes may be served.
California Penal Code § In every contract or agreement there is an implied promise of good faith and fair dealing. This implied promise means that each party will not do anything to unfairly interfere with the right of any other party to receive the benefits of the contract. Good faith means honesty of purpose without any intention to mislead or to take unfair advantage of another. Generally speaking, it means being faithful to one’s duty or obligation. However, the implied promise of good faith and fair dealing cannot create obligations that are inconsistent with the terms of the contract. Amazon by the very nature of selling 'Stolen Goods' as just one exampl, without full disclosure has violated "Good Faith and Fair Dealing" with every buyer of property from Amazon including the 'Elderly' which would kick in Elder Financial Abuse.
Ignorance of the law is neither an excuse nor a defense of the criminal act.
The very instant that a Defendant commits any other crimes, any property so obtained was then obtained by "Theft" and thus selling said property would be considered "Stolen Property" and could immediately constitute additional crimes under California Penal Code Section § 496.
There is a relatively unknown but extremely important, legal case decided by the California Appeals Court that will have a profound effect on Amazon and Jeff Bezos regarding the receiving of and selling 'stolen goods',
California Court of Appeals Fourth District, Division 3, Penal Code Section § 498(c) making it illegal to receive stolen goods allows Treble Damages GO46166 Decided January 15, 2013 Sharon Bell v. Igal J. Feibush does not require a criminal conviction under Section § 496(a).
In Bell v. Feibush (filed January 15, 2013) 2013 DJDAR 627, Feibush argues that permitting Bell to recover treble damages under section 496(c) is contrary to public policy and permits litigants to circumvent limitations on remedies. Our decision to affirm the default judgment is based on straightforward statutory interpretation. Section 496(a) extends liability to “(e)very person who buys or receives any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft.” (Italics added.) Penal Code section 484, subdivision (a) describes the acts constituting theft to include theft by false pretense, which is the consensual but fraudulent acquisition of property from its owner. (Pen.Code § 484, subd. (a), 532.) Feibush was found liable for fraud, i.e., for the fraudulent acquisition of property (money) from its owner (Bell). “Anything that could be the subject of a theft can also be property under section 496.” (People v. Gopal (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 524, 541, 217 Cal.Rptr. 487.) A principal in the actual theft of the property may be convicted for either theft or receiving stolen property under section 496(a).
Penal Code § 487 PC – Grand theft defined (may be charged in connection with receiving stolen property). (“Grand theft is theft committed in any of the following cases: (a) When the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950), except as provided in subdivision (b). (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), grand theft is committed in any of the following cases: . . . (c) When the property is taken from the person of another. (d) When the property taken is any of the following: (1) An automobile, horse, mare, gelding, any bovine animal, any caprine animal, mule, jack, jenny, sheep, lamb, hog, sow, boar, gilt, barrow, or pig. (2) A firearm.”)
Plaintiff contends that under California Penal Code section § 496 Defendants, by obtaining ownership even temporarily via committing a criminal act in violation of California Penal Code section § 532 Defendant did so illegally and thus obtained momentary and temporary ownership of said property stored in an Amazon warehouse, fulfillment center, to sell to millions of unsuspecting buyers by false pretenses makes the property transfer tantamount to "receiving and then subsequently selling stolen property", a felony under California Law.
California has an extremely valuable law for Senior Citizens, individuals 65 years old and over commonly referred to as Elder Financial Abuse Act.
There are approximately 9 million residents of California aged 65+, of which a substantial number have at one time or another purchased property from Amazon, which makes their situation a monumental dilemma for Jeff Bezos and his Amazon company.
California Penal Code sections 368(d) and 368(e) Elder Financial Abuse and Civil Code Section § 1575
Elder Financial Abuse is both a civil tort and a criminal offense.
It is not necessary under these statutes that the taker maintain an intent to defraud; rather, a person is guilty of committing financial elder abuse so long as it would be obvious to a reasonable person that the taker is not entitled to the elder’s assets.
When Amazon for instance charges a Senior for its "Prime" account and sells them 'stolen goods, counterfeit, dangerous and/or defective products it could be construed as by false pretenses and thusly Elder Financial Abuse may have taken place in which the law now can be invoked to protect the financial wherewithal of the deceived individual.
The State of California only requires that the agreived need be a California resident, 65 years of age and cheated in some amount not specified, basically defrauded in any amount for this law to kick in.
California Penal Code sections 368(d) and 368(e)
(d) Any person who is not a caretaker who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of an elder or a dependent adult, and who knows or reasonably should know that the victim is an elder or a dependent adult, is punishable as follows:
(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(e) Any caretaker of an elder or a dependent adult who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of that elder or dependent adult, is punishable as follows:
(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
California Welfare and Institutions Code § 15610.07.
"Abuse of an elder or a dependent adult" means either of the following:
(a) Physical abuse, neglect, financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering.
(b) The deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering.
15610.27. "Elder" means any person residing in this state, 65 years of age or older.
California Welfare and Institutions Code 15610.30.
(a) "Financial abuse" of an elder or dependent adult occurs when a person or entity does any of the following:
(1) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both.
(2) Assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both.
(3) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains, or assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining, real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult by undue influence, as defined in Section 15610.70 and by Section 1575 of the Civil Code.
(b) A person or entity shall be deemed to have taken, secreted, appropriated, obtained, or retained property for a wrongful use if, among other things, the person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains the property and the person or entity knew or should have known that this conduct is likely to be harmful to the elder or dependent adult.
(c) For purposes of this section, a person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property when an elder or dependent adult is deprived of any property right, including by means of an agreement, donative transfer, or testamentary bequest, regardless of whether the property is held directly or by a representative of an elder or dependent adult.
Not all of California's 9 million residents 65+ years are involved with everything stated herein however a vast majority may have the circumstances regarding their respective dealings with Amazon creating monumental legal ramifications with potential
California Welfare and Institutions Code section § 15657.5 provides:
(a) Where it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant is liable for financial abuse, as defined n Section 15610.30, in addition to all other remedies otherwise provided by law, the court shall award to the plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees and costs. The term "costs" includes, but is not limited to, reasonable fees for the services of a conservator, if any, devoted to the litigation of a claim brought under this article.
(b) Where it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant is liable for financial abuse, as defined in Section 15610.30, and where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of the abuse, in addition to reasonable attorney's fees and costs set forth in subdivision (a), and all other remedies otherwise provided by law, the following shall apply:
(1) The limitations imposed by Section 377.34 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the damages recoverable shall not apply.
(2) The standards set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 3294 of the Civil Code regarding the imposition of punitive damages on an employer based upon the acts of an employee shall be satisfied before any damages or attorney's fees permitted under this section may be imposed against an employer.
(c) Nothing in this section affects the award of punitive damages under Section 3294 of the Civil Code.
One of the absolutely fantastic scenarios regarding California's Elder Financial Abuse Act is should a Plaintiff decide to file a lawsuit against a Defendant the law states that if the Plaintiff prevails then is awarded reasonable costs and attorney fees however conversely if does not prevail the Plaintiff has no legal obligation to reimburse the Defendant any of their costs or attorney fees.
The California legislature decided to give tremendous teeth to this law so seniors would be more inclined to pursue their perpetrator knowing that if they were not successful they would not be burdened with a horrific legal expense of the Defendant.
Being aware of this above information it would appear that there may well be numerous lawsuits initiated against any company that has willfully and knowingly sold among other things 'stolen goods' to the vulnerable California residents over the age of 65 and even possibly the other 49 states residents as well depending on the various laws pertaining to their situations!
No one should be above the law, not even Jeff Bezos, common thieves deal in 'stolen goods' and when found guilty in a court of law they are sentenced to prison, Jeff Bezos should be no different!
Jeff Bezos admitted emphatically that he knowingly allowed Amazon to sell 'stolen goods' which is also know as stolen property, stolen merchandise etc. and he should be held accountable and forced to face a criminal trial jury of his peers. If found guilty, it would be extremely difficult to render any other verdict, as he testified under oath to Congress and that Congressional Hearing was televised and viewed by millions of people around the world that Amazon sells 'stolen goods'.
Amazon, by Jeff Bezos' testimony, has over a million third-party sellers so it would be reasonable to conclude even a minescule percentage could amount to tens of thousands of 'stolen goods' would be handled by Amazon and therefore the penalty for each individual infraction could conceivably bring about several years in prison and then multiplied by the massive number of sales of 'stolen goods' could amount to a lifetime behind bars, and the evidence of his direct and irrefutable testimony would cause his conviction without the need for any witnesses. And to even magnify this each act of selling 'stolen goods' is the direct result of receiving 'stolen goods', another set of felonies for each. Jeff Bezos, if convicted, may never see the light of day beyond his prison walls. Amazon did nothing to investigate and vet these sellers to determine for themselves that none of this property was stolen or counterfeit so he deserves whatever sentence the various juries decide. Had Amazon conducted sufficient due diligence instead of just being focused on the almighty dollar they could have easily prevented this criminal action of receiving and selling 'stolen goods'.
All of the District Attorneys and Attorneys General in every jurisdiction throughout the United States could prosecute Jeff Bezos and in addition to prison incarceration could quite possibly enforce Billions of Dollars in fines and court costs which very well may reduce Jeff Bezos from being the richest man in the world to just your average every day common felon criminal. Daunting thought to say the least. Jeff Bezos may receive his come uppings and he has no one else to blame except himself for being so greedy as to knowingly sell 'stolen goods'.
In August 2019 the FBI uncovered a theft ring in Seattle, where Amazon is headquartered, that sold millions of dollars' of 'stolen goods' on Amazon.com in just the past 6 years FBI agent Ariana Kroshinsky wrote in her affidavit.
The guilty must face the consequences of their actions and Jeff Bezos must be held to the same legal standards that all Americans agree to live by and he may have become a multi billionaire because he engaged in selling 'stolen goods' where the great majority of Americans walk the narrow path of honesty instead of criminal activity and apparently Jeff Bezos chose the easy road with impunity!
Approximately 145 Million people around the globe subscribe to Amazon's "Prime" accounts and pay billions of dollars for the privelege believing that Amazon would act in their best interest and never sell them any counterfeit, dangerous, defective or 'stolen goods' and because Amazon deceived them they at the very least should have the entirety of their costs refunded to them which would most likely amount to BILLIONS of dollars which would then affect the income to Amazon being decreased exponentially and subsequently reduce the stock value accordingly. Amazon would be required to file documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission of these 'material facts'.
There is another possible smoking gun regarding how Amazon conducts their respective businesses and that is their "Terms of Service". If their "Terms of Service" are worded in a specific way with the intent to deceive as mentioned above then quite possibly it could be construed in a court of law that it is a "Scheme or Artifice to Defraud" in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1346 which could eliminate it from their business entirely by making it invalid and unenforceable in every aspect. This would open up a whole new legal quandary for Amazon should the courts decide to deem their "Terms of Service" unenforceable.
Most major corporations have a 'morals clause' as part of their employee contracts which should include all executives and members of the Board of Directors, wherein if any of them violate it they should be terminated for committing or allowing knowingly criminal acts such as multiple felonies. It would be difficult, if not impossible to claim 'plausible deniability' since the CEO Jeff Bezos admitted under oath his direct knowledge of Amazon engaging in the selling of 'stolen goods'.
Another gleaming aspect of this criminal behavior within Amazon's hierarchy is that in the commission of this very serious crime situation is that the law requires what is referred to as "Clawback" which details that all money generated in the act of committing a Felony the proceeds can be confiscated and/or forfeited to the respective governmental agencies having jurisdiction.
In the case with Jeff Bezos, if found guilty, his multiple million dollar personal acquisitions such as his mansions in Beverly Hills and Washington D.C. and the newspaper Washington Post etc. should also be forfeited as the benefits gained from illegal activity selling 'stolen goods.'
At the risk of being redundant, no one should be above the law which would include Jeff Bezos and when prosecuted finalized and established that he is guilty his forfeitures should amount to several Billion dollars. He was aware of his crimes and did nothing to prevent it and therefore 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime". We reap exactly what we sow, including the richest man in the world.
The numerous law enforcement agencies who have jurisdiction of the crimes locations, which might be all 50 states, should prosecute every high ranking executive within Amazon including but not limited to CEO Jeff Bezos to the fullest extent of the law and sentence them to the maximum number of years possible to set an example that literally no one is above the law and thus these severe penalties will be a deterrant to any other corporate execs to refrain from engaging is such egergious activities against their fellow man!
There may be other foreign entities such as Canada, the European Union, Great Britain, Ireland among numerous others that want to initiate their own legal proceedings against Amazon, Jeff Bezos along with additional senior executives who participated and allowed the crime of selling 'stolen goods' to have their day in court.
Jeff Bezos may come to 'Rue the Day' that he admitted under oath to selling 'stolen goods'!
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020, the world's richest man, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, testified under oath before the United States Congress answering questions regarding his company's anti-competitive behavior.
During the five-hour-long Q&A session Jeff Bezos was hit with a wide array of questions about topics ranging from Amazon's controversial use of third-party seller data to turning a blind eye to counterfeit products and selling 'stolen goods'.
Being the founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos is acutely aware of literally all that happens within his Amazon empire as he would be the most knowledgeable regarding the inner workings of his own company which is precisely how he became the richest man in the entire world.
David Cicilline, the chair of the House of Representative's Antitrust subcommittee who was leading the investigation into Amazon's stated "As CEO and founder of the company, (Jeff Bezos) must be accountable for Amazon's record of dishonesty before Congress", and "In light of the gravity of this situation, I am also considering whether a perjury referral is warranted".
Congress also said that the company statements "appear to be misleading, and possibly criminally false or perjurious".
For example, when Rep. Pramila Jayapal asked him whether Amazon ever used third-party seller data to create competing products under its own label, Bezos dodged that direct and specific question by replying "I can't answer yes or no to that question".
"We have a policy against using seller-specific data to aid our private-label business", he added, "But I can't guarantee you that that policy has never been violated". Jeff Bezos knows full well what takes place at Amazon, he answered in that verbiage to cover himself and not be found guilty of perjury.
Pressed to address allegations of Amazon's data appropriation exposed in a Wall Street Journal investigation in April, Bezos said he didn't know the specifics yet. "We continue to look into that very carefully".
In a separate exchange later in the hearing, Congresswoman Rep. Lucy McBath of Georgia asked Bezos whether Amazon has allowed 'stolen goods' to be sold on its platform. Rep. McBath asked Jeff Bezos, "Are 'stolen goods' sold on Amazon? To which Bezos replied, "Congresswoman, not to my knowledge". This response was absolute perjury to the United States Congress because Jeff Bezos was acutely aware of the August 2019 FBI investigation of the $10 Million dollar theft ring that sold 'stolen goods' on Amazon!
Asked more than once Jeff Bezos eventually admitted under oath that yes, Amazon does indeed sell 'stolen goods' by stating among other things that "There are more than one million sellers on Amazon. I'm sure there have been 'stolen goods' sold on Amazon".
Rep. McBath asked point blank again, "So basically Mr. Bezos that means you are saying YES?" To which Bezos finally responded, "I GUESS SO".
Pressed further by Rep. McBath on the subject of selling 'stolen goods', Jeff Bezos stated "I don't think it's a large part of what we are doing". Are you kidding Jeff Bezos, NOT A LARGE PART OF WHAT WE ARE DOING! You act as if it's no big deal but definitely something that brings in lots of income so we just close our eyes and let the money flow in from our 'stolen goods' business!
Mr. Bezos, 'Go straight to jail, do not pass go, do not collect the $200, just like the play monopoly game'! It appears to you that selling 'stolen goods' is something you take for granted and enjoy since it's part and parcel of what made you into a Billionaire and the richest man in the world. You mock the hard working honest people of America and you shold be ashamed of yourself...
Law enforcement can't ignore your blatant refusal to police your own company and eliminate once and for all the criminal behavior of selling 'stolen goods' etc. and they should proscecute you Jeff Bezos just like any street criminal who robs a liquor store for a couple hundred dollars. Not only does selling Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods' hurt the consumer but cause the prices of everything any legitimate business sells to try and offset what you do on what could possibly be an every day occurance.
Every individual engaged in Law Enforcement in the United States has sworn a sacred oath to "Defend the Constitution Against All Enemies Foreign and Domestic' and to uphold the law equally regardless of who may be the criminal so they must investigate and proscecute every perpetrator including Jeff Bezos as he is an 'admitted criminal' against his own customers.
Selling 'stolen goods' is a FELONY! Receiving 'stolen goods' is also a FELONY!
Since a vast number of third-party sellers ship their goods to be sold in the 'Fulfillment by Amazon' (FBA) and Amazon then receives and stores their products within Amazon's warehouses (fulfillment centers) and then the Amazon advertises the various products for sale, uses Amazon's payment methods, and then will pick, pack and ship them in Amazon packaging to the purchasers.
A California Appeals court ruled last April that Amazon was indeed the seller of record to Angela Bolger since Amazon's activities basically conducted the entire transaction from beginning to end even though they did not manufacture the defective product and harmed Bolger severely.
In respect with 'stolen goods' Amazon receives them from the third party sellers which means Amazon is committing numerous FELONIES by becoming the recipient of 'stolen property' and then selling/delivering 'stolen goods' with the full and complete knowledge of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos as verified by his sworn testimony before the United States Congress, can't be more substantiated proof than that! GUILTY!!!
Congress has demanded that Amazon discontinue selling 'Stolen Goods', Counterfeit, Illegal, Deadly and Deceptive Products.
There may be another possibility why sellers have chosen Amazon as their partner in crime and that is it would be the perfect mechanism to carry out 'money laundering', meaning taking the dirty money obtained via 'stolen goods' being sold at will on Amazon and then cleaning that same sales money, which is a 'Prime" method, and hopefully undetectable to Amazon since Amazon nor Jeff Bezos has been able to stem the tide of long term 'stolen goods' from being overwhelming sold on Amazon.
If Amazon has become too large and unwieldy then maybe the Federal Government should force Amazon into a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy which could then install one of their Bankruptcy Court Trustees to oversee and run the company since it appears that Jeff Bezos does not possess the necessary control capabilities to prevent and eliminate the proliferation of receiving and selling Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective and Illegal 'Stolen Goods' from their platform.
The United States Congress should subpoena every single sales document of Amazon for at least the past 10 years to establish exactly how many transactions contained any Counterfeit, Dangerous, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods' took place and reverse those illegal sales and return the entire purchase price to the consumer victims who was deceived.
California Penal Code Section § 496 - Receiving Stolen Property
Property is stolen if it was obtained by any type of theft, or by burglary or robbery. Theft includes obtaining property by larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, or trick.
To receive property means to take possession and control of it. Two or more people can possess the property at the same time.
A person does not have to actually hold or touch something to possess it. It is enough if the person has control over it either personally or through another person.
When Amazon third-party sellers deliver 'stolen goods' to an Amazon Fulfillment Center for resale and delivery the Amazon company is then the recipient of 'stolen property' based upon the California Penal Code Section § 496, they are part and parcel of the actual act.
California Penal Code section § 496, subdivision (a) (section 496(a)) makes receiving or buying property “that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft” a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment. Section § 496, subdivision (c) (section 496(c)) provides that any person “who has been injured by a violation of (section 496(a) may bring an action for three times the amount of actual damages, if any, sustained by the plaintiff, costs of suit, and reasonable attorney's fees.”
Plaintiffs contends, based on the statutory language, a criminal conviction under section 496(a) is not a prerequisite to recovery of treble damages under section 496(c). Plaintiff asserts that the phrase “any manner constituting theft” under section 496(a) includes theft by false pretense.
Leading buyers of Amazon products without disclosing that they may be 'counterfeit, damaged, deadly, defective, illegal, and/or 'stolen goods' is tantamount to selling via false pretenses and therefore may be considered the crime of theft by false pretense under California Penal Code Section § 496.
Receiving Stolen Property (Penal Code, § 496(a)). (“(Property is stolen if it was obtained by any type of theft, or by burglary or robbery. (Theft includes obtaining property by larceny, embezzlement, false pretense, or trick.))”)
Theft by False Pretense, Larceny by Trickery, Unjust Inrichment (Price Gouging During the Coronavirus Pandemic Emergency), Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith are a few more that need to be investigated in the proocess of selling and receiving 'stolen goods' as they pertain to Amazon not disclosing these facts to potential buyers of the Counterfeit, Dangerous, Deadly, Defective, Illegal and 'Stolen Goods'.
California Penal Code § 532 (a) Every person who knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defrauds any other person of money, labor, or property, whether real or personal, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character, and by thus imposing upon any person obtains credit, and thereby fraudulently gets possession of money or property, or obtains the labor or service of another, is punishable in the same manner and to the same extent as for larceny of the money or property so obtained.
California Penal Code § 484 Larceny (a) Every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another, or who shall fraudulently appropriate property which has been entrusted to him or her, or who shall knowingly and designedly, by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense, defraud any other person of money, labor or real or personal property, or who causes or procures others to report falsely of his or her wealth or mercantile character and by thus imposing upon any person, obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft.
California Penal Code § 396 (a) The Legislature hereby finds that during a state of emergency or local emergency, including, but not limited to, an earthquake, flood, fire, riot, storm, drought, plant or animal infestation or disease, pandemic or epidemic disease outbreak, or other natural or manmade disaster, some merchants have taken unfair advantage of consumers by greatly increasing prices for essential consumer goods and services. While the pricing of consumer goods and services is generally best left to the marketplace under ordinary conditions, when a declared state of emergency or local emergency results in abnormal disruptions of the market, the public interest requires that excessive and unjustified increases in the prices of essential consumer goods and services be prohibited. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to protect citizens from excessive and unjustified increases in the prices charged during or shortly after a declared state of emergency or local emergency for goods and services that are vital and necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of consumers, whether those goods and services are offered or sold in person, in stores, or online. Further, it is the intent of the Legislature that this section be liberally construed so that its beneficial purposes may be served.
California Penal Code § In every contract or agreement there is an implied promise of good faith and fair dealing. This implied promise means that each party will not do anything to unfairly interfere with the right of any other party to receive the benefits of the contract. Good faith means honesty of purpose without any intention to mislead or to take unfair advantage of another. Generally speaking, it means being faithful to one’s duty or obligation. However, the implied promise of good faith and fair dealing cannot create obligations that are inconsistent with the terms of the contract. Amazon by the very nature of selling 'Stolen Goods' as just one exampl, without full disclosure has violated "Good Faith and Fair Dealing" with every buyer of property from Amazon including the 'Elderly' which would kick in Elder Financial Abuse.
Ignorance of the law is neither an excuse nor a defense of the criminal act.
The very instant that a Defendant commits any other crimes, any property so obtained was then obtained by "Theft" and thus selling said property would be considered "Stolen Property" and could immediately constitute additional crimes under California Penal Code Section § 496.
There is a relatively unknown but extremely important, legal case decided by the California Appeals Court that will have a profound effect on Amazon and Jeff Bezos regarding the receiving of and selling 'stolen goods',
California Court of Appeals Fourth District, Division 3, Penal Code Section § 498(c) making it illegal to receive stolen goods allows Treble Damages GO46166 Decided January 15, 2013 Sharon Bell v. Igal J. Feibush does not require a criminal conviction under Section § 496(a).
In Bell v. Feibush (filed January 15, 2013) 2013 DJDAR 627, Feibush argues that permitting Bell to recover treble damages under section 496(c) is contrary to public policy and permits litigants to circumvent limitations on remedies. Our decision to affirm the default judgment is based on straightforward statutory interpretation. Section 496(a) extends liability to “(e)very person who buys or receives any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft.” (Italics added.) Penal Code section 484, subdivision (a) describes the acts constituting theft to include theft by false pretense, which is the consensual but fraudulent acquisition of property from its owner. (Pen.Code § 484, subd. (a), 532.) Feibush was found liable for fraud, i.e., for the fraudulent acquisition of property (money) from its owner (Bell). “Anything that could be the subject of a theft can also be property under section 496.” (People v. Gopal (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 524, 541, 217 Cal.Rptr. 487.) A principal in the actual theft of the property may be convicted for either theft or receiving stolen property under section 496(a).
Penal Code § 487 PC – Grand theft defined (may be charged in connection with receiving stolen property). (“Grand theft is theft committed in any of the following cases: (a) When the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950), except as provided in subdivision (b). (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), grand theft is committed in any of the following cases: . . . (c) When the property is taken from the person of another. (d) When the property taken is any of the following: (1) An automobile, horse, mare, gelding, any bovine animal, any caprine animal, mule, jack, jenny, sheep, lamb, hog, sow, boar, gilt, barrow, or pig. (2) A firearm.”)
Plaintiff contends that under California Penal Code section § 496 Defendants, by obtaining ownership even temporarily via committing a criminal act in violation of California Penal Code section § 532 Defendant did so illegally and thus obtained momentary and temporary ownership of said property stored in an Amazon warehouse, fulfillment center, to sell to millions of unsuspecting buyers by false pretenses makes the property transfer tantamount to "receiving and then subsequently selling stolen property", a felony under California Law.
California has an extremely valuable law for Senior Citizens, individuals 65 years old and over commonly referred to as Elder Financial Abuse Act.
There are approximately 9 million residents of California aged 65+, of which a substantial number have at one time or another purchased property from Amazon, which makes their situation a monumental dilemma for Jeff Bezos and his Amazon company.
California Penal Code sections 368(d) and 368(e) Elder Financial Abuse and Civil Code Section § 1575
Elder Financial Abuse is both a civil tort and a criminal offense.
It is not necessary under these statutes that the taker maintain an intent to defraud; rather, a person is guilty of committing financial elder abuse so long as it would be obvious to a reasonable person that the taker is not entitled to the elder’s assets.
When Amazon for instance charges a Senior for its "Prime" account and sells them 'stolen goods, counterfeit, dangerous and/or defective products it could be construed as by false pretenses and thusly Elder Financial Abuse may have taken place in which the law now can be invoked to protect the financial wherewithal of the deceived individual.
The State of California only requires that the agreived need be a California resident, 65 years of age and cheated in some amount not specified, basically defrauded in any amount for this law to kick in.
California Penal Code sections 368(d) and 368(e)
(d) Any person who is not a caretaker who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of an elder or a dependent adult, and who knows or reasonably should know that the victim is an elder or a dependent adult, is punishable as follows:
(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(e) Any caretaker of an elder or a dependent adult who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of that elder or dependent adult, is punishable as follows:
(1) By a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
(2) By a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment, when the moneys, labor, goods, services, or real or personal property taken or obtained is of a value not exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).
California Welfare and Institutions Code § 15610.07.
"Abuse of an elder or a dependent adult" means either of the following:
(a) Physical abuse, neglect, financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering.
(b) The deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering.
15610.27. "Elder" means any person residing in this state, 65 years of age or older.
California Welfare and Institutions Code 15610.30.
(a) "Financial abuse" of an elder or dependent adult occurs when a person or entity does any of the following:
(1) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both.
(2) Assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both.
(3) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains, or assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining, real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult by undue influence, as defined in Section 15610.70 and by Section 1575 of the Civil Code.
(b) A person or entity shall be deemed to have taken, secreted, appropriated, obtained, or retained property for a wrongful use if, among other things, the person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains the property and the person or entity knew or should have known that this conduct is likely to be harmful to the elder or dependent adult.
(c) For purposes of this section, a person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property when an elder or dependent adult is deprived of any property right, including by means of an agreement, donative transfer, or testamentary bequest, regardless of whether the property is held directly or by a representative of an elder or dependent adult.
Not all of California's 9 million residents 65+ years are involved with everything stated herein however a vast majority may have the circumstances regarding their respective dealings with Amazon creating monumental legal ramifications with potential
California Welfare and Institutions Code section § 15657.5 provides:
(a) Where it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant is liable for financial abuse, as defined n Section 15610.30, in addition to all other remedies otherwise provided by law, the court shall award to the plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees and costs. The term "costs" includes, but is not limited to, reasonable fees for the services of a conservator, if any, devoted to the litigation of a claim brought under this article.
(b) Where it is proven by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant is liable for financial abuse, as defined in Section 15610.30, and where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice in the commission of the abuse, in addition to reasonable attorney's fees and costs set forth in subdivision (a), and all other remedies otherwise provided by law, the following shall apply:
(1) The limitations imposed by Section 377.34 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the damages recoverable shall not apply.
(2) The standards set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 3294 of the Civil Code regarding the imposition of punitive damages on an employer based upon the acts of an employee shall be satisfied before any damages or attorney's fees permitted under this section may be imposed against an employer.
(c) Nothing in this section affects the award of punitive damages under Section 3294 of the Civil Code.
One of the absolutely fantastic scenarios regarding California's Elder Financial Abuse Act is should a Plaintiff decide to file a lawsuit against a Defendant the law states that if the Plaintiff prevails then is awarded reasonable costs and attorney fees however conversely if does not prevail the Plaintiff has no legal obligation to reimburse the Defendant any of their costs or attorney fees.
The California legislature decided to give tremendous teeth to this law so seniors would be more inclined to pursue their perpetrator knowing that if they were not successful they would not be burdened with a horrific legal expense of the Defendant.
Being aware of this above information it would appear that there may well be numerous lawsuits initiated against any company that has willfully and knowingly sold among other things 'stolen goods' to the vulnerable California residents over the age of 65 and even possibly the other 49 states residents as well depending on the various laws pertaining to their situations!
New York Attorney General Letitia James sent a letter to Amazon in April saying it was looking into whether the company violated federal employment law or broke the state's whistleblower laws when it fired a worker who organized a strike at its Staten Island facility. Jun 12, 2020
Listed below are a "Prime" example as to just how "Notorious" Amazon really is! These are but a miniscule few examples of what has been freely promoted for sale by Amazon much to the chagrin of the unsuspecting public, absolutely deplorable.
December 14, 2020
California urges court to compel Amazon to comply with coronavirus probe
(Reuters) -California Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Monday petitioned a court to compel Amazon.com Inc to comply with outstanding investigative subpoenas over the probe of the company’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
The petition, filed with the Sacramento County Superior Court, alleges that Amazon has failed to adequately comply with requests for information as part of this probe that looks into the company’s coronavirus protocols and the status of COVID-19 cases at its facilities across the state.
“Amazon has delayed responding adequately to our investigative requests long enough,” Becerra said in the petition.
The subpoenas seek specific details about the nature and extent of Amazon’s coronavirus prevention efforts, including sick leave policies, cleaning procedures, as well as data on the number of infections and deaths at its warehouses in California, the petition said.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
California urges court to compel Amazon to comply with coronavirus probe
(Reuters) -California Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Monday petitioned a court to compel Amazon.com Inc to comply with outstanding investigative subpoenas over the probe of the company’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
The petition, filed with the Sacramento County Superior Court, alleges that Amazon has failed to adequately comply with requests for information as part of this probe that looks into the company’s coronavirus protocols and the status of COVID-19 cases at its facilities across the state.
“Amazon has delayed responding adequately to our investigative requests long enough,” Becerra said in the petition.
The subpoenas seek specific details about the nature and extent of Amazon’s coronavirus prevention efforts, including sick leave policies, cleaning procedures, as well as data on the number of infections and deaths at its warehouses in California, the petition said.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Even though a Congresswoman asks a direct question requiring a yes or no answer Jeff Bezos just hasn't the ability to follow those instructions, is this indicative of people who lie! One would think that such a rich individual could understand how to answer questions instead of being so evasive.
Amazon hit with E.U. antitrust charges over its use of data November 10, 2020
The e-commerce giant faces a possible fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide revenue, which could amount to billions of dollars.
LONDON — European Union regulators have filed antitrust charges against Amazon, accusing the e-commerce giant of using data to gain an unfair advantage over merchants using its platform.
The E.U.'s executive commission, the bloc's top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that the charges have been sent to the company.
The commission said it takes issue with Amazon's systematic use of non-public business data to avoid “the normal risks of competition and to leverage its dominance" for e-commerce services in France and Germany, the company's two biggest markets in the E.U.
The E.U. started looking into Amazon in 2018 and has been focusing on its dual role as a marketplace and retailer.
In addition to selling its own products, the U.S. company allows third-party retailers to sell their own goods through its site. Last year, more than half of the items sold on Amazon worldwide were from these outside merchants.
Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, the E.U. commissioner in charge of competition, said it’s not a problem that Amazon is a successful business but “our concern is very specific business conduct which appears to distort genuine competition.”
Vestager also opened a second investigation into Amazon over whether it favours its own
The e-commerce giant faces a possible fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide revenue, which could amount to billions of dollars.
LONDON — European Union regulators have filed antitrust charges against Amazon, accusing the e-commerce giant of using data to gain an unfair advantage over merchants using its platform.
The E.U.'s executive commission, the bloc's top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that the charges have been sent to the company.
The commission said it takes issue with Amazon's systematic use of non-public business data to avoid “the normal risks of competition and to leverage its dominance" for e-commerce services in France and Germany, the company's two biggest markets in the E.U.
The E.U. started looking into Amazon in 2018 and has been focusing on its dual role as a marketplace and retailer.
In addition to selling its own products, the U.S. company allows third-party retailers to sell their own goods through its site. Last year, more than half of the items sold on Amazon worldwide were from these outside merchants.
Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, the E.U. commissioner in charge of competition, said it’s not a problem that Amazon is a successful business but “our concern is very specific business conduct which appears to distort genuine competition.”
Vestager also opened a second investigation into Amazon over whether it favours its own
There have been numerous reports that Amazon, the company founded by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, has advertised to hire individuals with spying skills that could quite possibly spy on Amazon employees and more, a disturbing fact if true, and copies of those ads are attached.
Why would the richest man in the world be so paranoid and deathly afraid of his own employees that he felt compelled to hire people to illegally spy on them?
The United States Senate is so understandably concerned that they felt the need to send Jeff Bezos a formal letter asking him if he is indeed spying on his own employees at Amazon! (letter attached)
The same U.S. Senate sent Jeff Bezos another letter demanding that AmazonBasics discontinue selling products that are fire hazards which have already severely harmed several Amazon customers. (letter attached)
U.S. Senator Brian Schatz, on behalf of himself and Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernard Sanders and Kirsten Gillibrand, sent Jeff Bezos a letter on October 15, 2020 and requesting a response to their very direct and specific 18 questions no later than November 1, 2020 stating among other things that Amazon emphatically "misled Congress" which is an extremely hazardous situation to be in to say the least. (letter attached)
Amazon is well known for selling dangerous and defective products to their customers, and when these people are harmed, denying emphatically that Amazon has no responsibility whatsoever to even pay medical bills for their customers who have been physically harmed by their defective products.
Jeff Bezos is unconcerned with the extensive damage inflicted upon the unsuspecting Amazon consumers, but instead is much more interested in increasing his monumentally vast wealth at their expense, regardless of any pain and suffering they endure caused by the defective merchandise delivered by Amazon.
The California Appeals Court ruled recently that Amazon can not escape responsibility for defective products that severely harmed Angela Bolger when a defective laptop battery exploded and burnt her causing enormous pain and suffering however Amazon refused to acknowledge that they were in fact at fault even though they were the legal seller of the hazardous laptop. Just one example of many that indicates the risk one takes when trusting Amazon to do the right thing.
In another dangerous product situation Amazon has settled a high-stakes battle over its liability for defective merchandise that left a woman blind in one eye, the company's lawyer told a federal judge.
News of the settlement was revealed in papers that were quietly filed late last week. Terms were not disclosed.
The deal brings an end to a closely watched fight over Amazon's legal responsibility for products sold through its online marketplace.
The battle dated to 2016, when Pennsylvania resident Heather Oberdorf alleged she was severely injured by a faulty product she purchased via Amazon's marketplace from the vendor The Furry Gang.
She and her husband sued Amazon in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, claiming that the company sold a product with a defective design.
Oberdorf alleged that she purchased a dog collar from Amazon's marketplace in December of 2014. Several weeks after Oberdorf began using the collar, her dog lunged while on a walk and broke the collar's ring, causing the retractable leash Oberdorf was holding to recoil. The leash hit her eyeglasses, causing them to shatter into her left eye and permanently blinding her in one eye.
The 3rd Circuit sent the case to Pennsylvania's highest court, which was slated to rule on whether Amazon would be considered a seller under Pennsylvania law.
But Amazon and Oberdorf reached a settlement before that court issued a decision.
It would appear that Amazon rushed to settle the lawsuit quickly so it could not establish a another legal precedent against their being held responsible for defective products again.
Every person who purchases anything from Amazon literally risks his or her own life because of the defective and counterfeit products that freely flow through their warehouses on any given day and there is no way to know in advance which items can cause you severe harm, Amazon does not investigate which products are harmful and apparently they don’t care enough to find out and prevent the sale since Jeff Bezos has become extremely rich through those sales.
In addition, several governments around the world are investigating Amazon such as Canada, the European Union and India for conduct detrimental to their own customers, a sad state of affairs.
Does this sound like an organization everyone should entrust their hard earned money with, NOT!
At the very least Amazon employees in the United States should form a union for their own protection before it becomes too late and then even Congress will be unable to protect them. Worst case scenario would be for all employees to all go on strike indefinitely until Amazon agrees unequivocally to allow them to join a union.
Why would the richest man in the world be so paranoid and deathly afraid of his own employees that he felt compelled to hire people to illegally spy on them?
The United States Senate is so understandably concerned that they felt the need to send Jeff Bezos a formal letter asking him if he is indeed spying on his own employees at Amazon! (letter attached)
The same U.S. Senate sent Jeff Bezos another letter demanding that AmazonBasics discontinue selling products that are fire hazards which have already severely harmed several Amazon customers. (letter attached)
U.S. Senator Brian Schatz, on behalf of himself and Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernard Sanders and Kirsten Gillibrand, sent Jeff Bezos a letter on October 15, 2020 and requesting a response to their very direct and specific 18 questions no later than November 1, 2020 stating among other things that Amazon emphatically "misled Congress" which is an extremely hazardous situation to be in to say the least. (letter attached)
Amazon is well known for selling dangerous and defective products to their customers, and when these people are harmed, denying emphatically that Amazon has no responsibility whatsoever to even pay medical bills for their customers who have been physically harmed by their defective products.
Jeff Bezos is unconcerned with the extensive damage inflicted upon the unsuspecting Amazon consumers, but instead is much more interested in increasing his monumentally vast wealth at their expense, regardless of any pain and suffering they endure caused by the defective merchandise delivered by Amazon.
The California Appeals Court ruled recently that Amazon can not escape responsibility for defective products that severely harmed Angela Bolger when a defective laptop battery exploded and burnt her causing enormous pain and suffering however Amazon refused to acknowledge that they were in fact at fault even though they were the legal seller of the hazardous laptop. Just one example of many that indicates the risk one takes when trusting Amazon to do the right thing.
In another dangerous product situation Amazon has settled a high-stakes battle over its liability for defective merchandise that left a woman blind in one eye, the company's lawyer told a federal judge.
News of the settlement was revealed in papers that were quietly filed late last week. Terms were not disclosed.
The deal brings an end to a closely watched fight over Amazon's legal responsibility for products sold through its online marketplace.
The battle dated to 2016, when Pennsylvania resident Heather Oberdorf alleged she was severely injured by a faulty product she purchased via Amazon's marketplace from the vendor The Furry Gang.
She and her husband sued Amazon in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, claiming that the company sold a product with a defective design.
Oberdorf alleged that she purchased a dog collar from Amazon's marketplace in December of 2014. Several weeks after Oberdorf began using the collar, her dog lunged while on a walk and broke the collar's ring, causing the retractable leash Oberdorf was holding to recoil. The leash hit her eyeglasses, causing them to shatter into her left eye and permanently blinding her in one eye.
The 3rd Circuit sent the case to Pennsylvania's highest court, which was slated to rule on whether Amazon would be considered a seller under Pennsylvania law.
But Amazon and Oberdorf reached a settlement before that court issued a decision.
It would appear that Amazon rushed to settle the lawsuit quickly so it could not establish a another legal precedent against their being held responsible for defective products again.
Every person who purchases anything from Amazon literally risks his or her own life because of the defective and counterfeit products that freely flow through their warehouses on any given day and there is no way to know in advance which items can cause you severe harm, Amazon does not investigate which products are harmful and apparently they don’t care enough to find out and prevent the sale since Jeff Bezos has become extremely rich through those sales.
In addition, several governments around the world are investigating Amazon such as Canada, the European Union and India for conduct detrimental to their own customers, a sad state of affairs.
Does this sound like an organization everyone should entrust their hard earned money with, NOT!
At the very least Amazon employees in the United States should form a union for their own protection before it becomes too late and then even Congress will be unable to protect them. Worst case scenario would be for all employees to all go on strike indefinitely until Amazon agrees unequivocally to allow them to join a union.
The Laws governing the American people are derived from the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights which includes one of the most important, the First Amendment, allowing Free Speech which means we can all speak our voices without fear of prosecution.
This website is a repository to disseminate and publish important information regarding any potentially illegal or unethical activities by the leadership management of the Amazon (dot com) Inc. organization and will be constantly updated as facts become known and available.
Amazon is Notorious for being involved with intolerable actions within its ranks and the company should be broken up into numerous different and smaller parts or eliminated completely due to them allowing despicable acts to occur and Amazon has been accused by several governmental agencies for deplorable activities such as Anti Competitive Business, Antitrust Concerns, Bribery, Counterfeit Products, Defective Products, Discrimination, Fake Product Reviews, Illegal Insider Stock Trading, Intellectual Property Piracy, Market Dominance, Predatory Pricing, Price Fixing, Price Gouging, Racism, Retaliation, Sexism, Sexual Harassment, Social Injustice, Unethical Practices and Unsafe Working Conditions just to name a few.
This website is a repository to disseminate and publish important information regarding any potentially illegal or unethical activities by the leadership management of the Amazon (dot com) Inc. organization and will be constantly updated as facts become known and available.
Amazon is Notorious for being involved with intolerable actions within its ranks and the company should be broken up into numerous different and smaller parts or eliminated completely due to them allowing despicable acts to occur and Amazon has been accused by several governmental agencies for deplorable activities such as Anti Competitive Business, Antitrust Concerns, Bribery, Counterfeit Products, Defective Products, Discrimination, Fake Product Reviews, Illegal Insider Stock Trading, Intellectual Property Piracy, Market Dominance, Predatory Pricing, Price Fixing, Price Gouging, Racism, Retaliation, Sexism, Sexual Harassment, Social Injustice, Unethical Practices and Unsafe Working Conditions just to name a few.
Notorious Markets - The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) reports on the adequacy and effectiveness of trading partners’ protection of intellectual property rights and the findings of its Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy, which highlights online and physical markets that reportedly engage in and facilitate substantial trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy.
“The Trump Administration is committed to holding intellectual property rights violators accountable and to ensuring that American innovators and creators have a full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their work,” said U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.
The United States Government has determined that Amazon, the company founded and operated by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, facilitates the criminal activity of trademark counterfeiting and piracy of products sales to billions of people around the globe for which Amazon profits enormously through these highly illegal actions.
White House trade and economic adviser Peter Navarro defended the decision to add the Amazon websites to the notorious markets list saying "This is an action clearly justified by the behavior of the worst counterfeit-enabler in the world and the Amazon brain trust would rather fight this out in the media through their swamp-creature spin doctors than clean up their marketplace in the urgent ways necessary to protect the American people from fraud and often physical harm from dangerous counterfeit products."
“The Trump Administration is committed to holding intellectual property rights violators accountable and to ensuring that American innovators and creators have a full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their work,” said U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.
The United States Government has determined that Amazon, the company founded and operated by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, facilitates the criminal activity of trademark counterfeiting and piracy of products sales to billions of people around the globe for which Amazon profits enormously through these highly illegal actions.
White House trade and economic adviser Peter Navarro defended the decision to add the Amazon websites to the notorious markets list saying "This is an action clearly justified by the behavior of the worst counterfeit-enabler in the world and the Amazon brain trust would rather fight this out in the media through their swamp-creature spin doctors than clean up their marketplace in the urgent ways necessary to protect the American people from fraud and often physical harm from dangerous counterfeit products."
Commercial-scale copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting cause significant financial losses for U.S. right holders and legitimate businesses, undermine critical U.S. comparative advantages in innovation and creativity to the detriment of American workers, and pose significant risks to consumer health and safety. The Notorious Markets List (NML) highlights prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets that reportedly engage in or facilitate substantial piracy or counterfeiting. A goal of the NML is to motivate appropriate action by the private sector and governments to reduce piracy and counterfeiting.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) highlights the following markets because they exemplify global counterfeiting and piracy concerns and because the scale of infringing activity in these markets can cause significant harm to U.S. intellectual property (IP) owners, consumers, legitimate online platforms, and the economy. Some of the identified markets reportedly host a combination of legitimate and unauthorized activities. Others openly or reportedly exist solely to engage in or facilitate unauthorized activity.
The NML is not an exhaustive account of all physical and online markets worldwide in which IP infringement may take place. The NML does not make findings of legal violations nor does it reflect the U.S. Government’s analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement climate in the countries connected with the listed markets. A broader analysis of IP protection and enforcement in particular countries or economies is presented in the annual Special 301 Report published at the end of April each year.
USTR developed the NML under the auspices of the annual Special 301 process and solicited comments through a Request for Public Comments published in the Federal Register (https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013). The NML is based predominantly on publicly available information. USTR has identified notorious markets in the Special 301 Report since 2006.
Since the release of the 2018 Notorious Markets List, there have been notable efforts to address widespread availability of pirated or counterfeit goods in some online and physical markets. The United States commends these efforts and encourages governments, right holders, service providers, and the owners and operators of these and other markets, including those newly identified in the 2019 NML, to engage in sustained and meaningful efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
Several studies this year addressed global trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a report on the latest trends in trade in counterfeit and pirated goods, based on data from 2016. This report found that trade in counterfeit and pirated physical goods has risen steadily in the last few years and now stands at 3.3% of global trade ($509 billion), with some industries being significantly more affected than others—22% for footwear, 15% for clothing, 13% for leather goods, and 12% for electrical equipment. The OECD report identifies corruption, poor IP enforcement, free trade zones, China’s role as a top producer of counterfeit and pirated goods, and the use of post or courier services to send small shipments as key factors behind this growth. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) investigated the “epidemic of counterfeit goods sold online” in the United States and issued a report finding that “[o]rganized criminals operating out of China are behind the vast majority of this fraud,” and that they are “supported by a large ecosystem of groups that arrange for credit card processing.” The BBB recommended that credit card payment processors increase their efforts to combat the sellers of counterfeit goods. A study by Ghostdata of counterfeit goods sold on Instagram found that the “top payment system is by far WeChat Pay,” which is owned by Chinese company Tencent.
The United States commends these efforts, appreciates studies being done in this area, and encourages its trading partners to continue their individual and cooperative efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
The Notorious Markets List identifies prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets in which pirated or counterfeit products and services reportedly are available or that facilitate substantial piracy and counterfeiting. It does not constitute a legal finding of a violation or an analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement environment in any country or economy. The NML is not an exhaustive inventory of all notorious markets around the world. Markets on the NML are drawn from the many nominations received as well as other input, such as from U.S. embassies, in order to highlight prominent examples of both online and physical markets where pirated or counterfeit goods and services reportedly are trafficked to the detriment of legitimate trade in IP-intensive goods and services.
Owners and operators of notorious markets that are willing to address piracy and counterfeiting have many options for doing so. Such owners and operators can, for example, adopt business models that rely on the licensed distribution of legitimate content and can negotiate appropriate licenses with right holders. If an otherwise legitimate business has become a platform for piracy or counterfeiting, the owner or operator can work with right holders and law enforcement officials to help discourage and curtail acts of infringement. Industry groups have developed a variety of best practices that can help combat counterfeiting and piracy. In the absence of good faith efforts, responsible government authorities should investigate reports of piracy and counterfeiting in these and similar markets and pursue appropriate action against such markets and their owners and operators. Governments should also ensure that appropriate enforcement tools are at the disposal of right holders and government authorities, which may require closing loopholes that permit operators to evade enforcement laws.
Presidential Memorandum addressing trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods. In January 2020, in response to the Presidential Memorandum, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a report on “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods.” The DHS report notes that, although e-commerce has supported the launch of thousands of legitimate businesses, e-commerce platforms, third-party marketplaces, and their supporting intermediaries have also served as powerful stimulants for the trafficking of counterfeit and pirated goods. Selling counterfeit and pirated goods through e-commerce platforms and related online third-party marketplaces can be a highly profitable venture. For counterfeiters, production costs are low, millions of potential customers are available online, transactions are convenient, and listing goods on well-known platforms provides an air of legitimacy. Moreover, when sellers of illicit goods are in another country, they are exposed to relatively little risk of criminal prosecution or civil liability under current law enforcement and regulatory practices.
USTR agrees that actions should be taken to protect American consumers and businesses against the harm and losses inflicted by counterfeiters.
In light of these concerns, USTR believes e-commerce platforms need to take additional actions to combat trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods and reduce the availability of such goods on their platforms. For example, the DHS “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods” report called for the swift adoption by e-commerce platforms that operate third-party marketplaces and other third-party intermediaries of the following ten high priority best practices:
1. Comprehensive "Terms of Service" Agreements
2. Significantly Enhanced Vetting of Third-Party Sellers
3. Limitations on High Risk Products
4. Efficient Notice and Takedown Procedures
5. Enhanced Post-Discovery Actions
6. Indemnity Requirements for Foreign Sellers
7. Clear Transactions Through Banks that Comply with U.S. Enforcement Requests
8. Pre-Sale Identification of Third-Party Sellers
9. Establish Marketplace Seller IDs
10. Clearly Identifiable Country of Origin Disclosures
Without such actions, U.S. right holders stand to be irreparably damaged by a flood of imported counterfeit and pirated goods on e-commerce platforms, regardless of where such platforms are based. Consistent with the Presidential Memorandum on Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, USTR will continue to address the issue of counterfeit and pirated goods with our trading partners and is considering seeking more information regarding e-commerce platforms, including those based in the United States, in future reviews of Notorious Markets.
AMAZON’S FOREIGN DOMAINS
Nominated as amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr, and amazon.in.
Submissions by right holders expressed concerns regarding the challenges related to combating counterfeits with respect to e-commerce platforms around the world. One submission specifically highlighted examples of the challenges right holders face with alleged high levels of counterfeit goods on the e-commerce platforms amazon.ca in Canada, amazon.de in Germany, amazon.fr in France, amazon.in in India, and amazon.co.uk in the United Kingdom. For example, right holders expressed concern that the seller information displayed by Amazon is often misleading such that it is difficult for consumers and right holders alike to determine who is selling the goods and that anyone can become a seller on Amazon with too much ease because Amazon does not sufficiently vet sellers on its platforms.
They also commented that Amazon’s counterfeit removal processes can be lengthy and burdensome, even for right holders that enroll in Amazon’s brand protection programs.
In addition, as the scale and sophistication of the counterfeiters have continued to grow and evolve over the years, these right holders indicate that Amazon should commit the resources necessary to make their brand protection programs scalable, transparent, and most importantly, effective. More specifically, they ask that Amazon take additional actions to address their concerns, including by collecting sufficient information from sellers to prevent repeat infringers from creating multiple storefronts on the platforms, making detailed information about the real seller of a product obvious to consumers and right holders, being more responsive to complaints of counterfeits by right holders, and being more proactive in preventing counterfeit goods from appearing on the platform.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
The 2019 Notorious Markets List is the result of the tenth out-of-cycle review of notorious markets, which USTR initiated on August 19, 2019, through a Federal Register Request for Public Comments. The request and responses are available at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013. USTR developed the 2019 NML in coordination with the federal agencies represented on the Special 301 Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC). Information about Special 301 and other intellectual property-related processes and issues is available at https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/intellectual-property.
To assist U.S. right holders and consumers who confront IP infringement online, the U.S. Government continues to expand the tools available on https://www.stopfakes.gov, including by providing links to infringement reporting mechanisms at a number of popular online retailers and markets. Victims and interested parties may report IP theft and import violations to U.S. law enforcement agencies through https://www.stopfakes
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) highlights the following markets because they exemplify global counterfeiting and piracy concerns and because the scale of infringing activity in these markets can cause significant harm to U.S. intellectual property (IP) owners, consumers, legitimate online platforms, and the economy. Some of the identified markets reportedly host a combination of legitimate and unauthorized activities. Others openly or reportedly exist solely to engage in or facilitate unauthorized activity.
The NML is not an exhaustive account of all physical and online markets worldwide in which IP infringement may take place. The NML does not make findings of legal violations nor does it reflect the U.S. Government’s analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement climate in the countries connected with the listed markets. A broader analysis of IP protection and enforcement in particular countries or economies is presented in the annual Special 301 Report published at the end of April each year.
USTR developed the NML under the auspices of the annual Special 301 process and solicited comments through a Request for Public Comments published in the Federal Register (https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013). The NML is based predominantly on publicly available information. USTR has identified notorious markets in the Special 301 Report since 2006.
Since the release of the 2018 Notorious Markets List, there have been notable efforts to address widespread availability of pirated or counterfeit goods in some online and physical markets. The United States commends these efforts and encourages governments, right holders, service providers, and the owners and operators of these and other markets, including those newly identified in the 2019 NML, to engage in sustained and meaningful efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
Several studies this year addressed global trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a report on the latest trends in trade in counterfeit and pirated goods, based on data from 2016. This report found that trade in counterfeit and pirated physical goods has risen steadily in the last few years and now stands at 3.3% of global trade ($509 billion), with some industries being significantly more affected than others—22% for footwear, 15% for clothing, 13% for leather goods, and 12% for electrical equipment. The OECD report identifies corruption, poor IP enforcement, free trade zones, China’s role as a top producer of counterfeit and pirated goods, and the use of post or courier services to send small shipments as key factors behind this growth. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) investigated the “epidemic of counterfeit goods sold online” in the United States and issued a report finding that “[o]rganized criminals operating out of China are behind the vast majority of this fraud,” and that they are “supported by a large ecosystem of groups that arrange for credit card processing.” The BBB recommended that credit card payment processors increase their efforts to combat the sellers of counterfeit goods. A study by Ghostdata of counterfeit goods sold on Instagram found that the “top payment system is by far WeChat Pay,” which is owned by Chinese company Tencent.
The United States commends these efforts, appreciates studies being done in this area, and encourages its trading partners to continue their individual and cooperative efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
The Notorious Markets List identifies prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets in which pirated or counterfeit products and services reportedly are available or that facilitate substantial piracy and counterfeiting. It does not constitute a legal finding of a violation or an analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement environment in any country or economy. The NML is not an exhaustive inventory of all notorious markets around the world. Markets on the NML are drawn from the many nominations received as well as other input, such as from U.S. embassies, in order to highlight prominent examples of both online and physical markets where pirated or counterfeit goods and services reportedly are trafficked to the detriment of legitimate trade in IP-intensive goods and services.
Owners and operators of notorious markets that are willing to address piracy and counterfeiting have many options for doing so. Such owners and operators can, for example, adopt business models that rely on the licensed distribution of legitimate content and can negotiate appropriate licenses with right holders. If an otherwise legitimate business has become a platform for piracy or counterfeiting, the owner or operator can work with right holders and law enforcement officials to help discourage and curtail acts of infringement. Industry groups have developed a variety of best practices that can help combat counterfeiting and piracy. In the absence of good faith efforts, responsible government authorities should investigate reports of piracy and counterfeiting in these and similar markets and pursue appropriate action against such markets and their owners and operators. Governments should also ensure that appropriate enforcement tools are at the disposal of right holders and government authorities, which may require closing loopholes that permit operators to evade enforcement laws.
Presidential Memorandum addressing trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods. In January 2020, in response to the Presidential Memorandum, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a report on “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods.” The DHS report notes that, although e-commerce has supported the launch of thousands of legitimate businesses, e-commerce platforms, third-party marketplaces, and their supporting intermediaries have also served as powerful stimulants for the trafficking of counterfeit and pirated goods. Selling counterfeit and pirated goods through e-commerce platforms and related online third-party marketplaces can be a highly profitable venture. For counterfeiters, production costs are low, millions of potential customers are available online, transactions are convenient, and listing goods on well-known platforms provides an air of legitimacy. Moreover, when sellers of illicit goods are in another country, they are exposed to relatively little risk of criminal prosecution or civil liability under current law enforcement and regulatory practices.
USTR agrees that actions should be taken to protect American consumers and businesses against the harm and losses inflicted by counterfeiters.
In light of these concerns, USTR believes e-commerce platforms need to take additional actions to combat trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods and reduce the availability of such goods on their platforms. For example, the DHS “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods” report called for the swift adoption by e-commerce platforms that operate third-party marketplaces and other third-party intermediaries of the following ten high priority best practices:
1. Comprehensive "Terms of Service" Agreements
2. Significantly Enhanced Vetting of Third-Party Sellers
3. Limitations on High Risk Products
4. Efficient Notice and Takedown Procedures
5. Enhanced Post-Discovery Actions
6. Indemnity Requirements for Foreign Sellers
7. Clear Transactions Through Banks that Comply with U.S. Enforcement Requests
8. Pre-Sale Identification of Third-Party Sellers
9. Establish Marketplace Seller IDs
10. Clearly Identifiable Country of Origin Disclosures
Without such actions, U.S. right holders stand to be irreparably damaged by a flood of imported counterfeit and pirated goods on e-commerce platforms, regardless of where such platforms are based. Consistent with the Presidential Memorandum on Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, USTR will continue to address the issue of counterfeit and pirated goods with our trading partners and is considering seeking more information regarding e-commerce platforms, including those based in the United States, in future reviews of Notorious Markets.
AMAZON’S FOREIGN DOMAINS
Nominated as amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr, and amazon.in.
Submissions by right holders expressed concerns regarding the challenges related to combating counterfeits with respect to e-commerce platforms around the world. One submission specifically highlighted examples of the challenges right holders face with alleged high levels of counterfeit goods on the e-commerce platforms amazon.ca in Canada, amazon.de in Germany, amazon.fr in France, amazon.in in India, and amazon.co.uk in the United Kingdom. For example, right holders expressed concern that the seller information displayed by Amazon is often misleading such that it is difficult for consumers and right holders alike to determine who is selling the goods and that anyone can become a seller on Amazon with too much ease because Amazon does not sufficiently vet sellers on its platforms.
They also commented that Amazon’s counterfeit removal processes can be lengthy and burdensome, even for right holders that enroll in Amazon’s brand protection programs.
In addition, as the scale and sophistication of the counterfeiters have continued to grow and evolve over the years, these right holders indicate that Amazon should commit the resources necessary to make their brand protection programs scalable, transparent, and most importantly, effective. More specifically, they ask that Amazon take additional actions to address their concerns, including by collecting sufficient information from sellers to prevent repeat infringers from creating multiple storefronts on the platforms, making detailed information about the real seller of a product obvious to consumers and right holders, being more responsive to complaints of counterfeits by right holders, and being more proactive in preventing counterfeit goods from appearing on the platform.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
The 2019 Notorious Markets List is the result of the tenth out-of-cycle review of notorious markets, which USTR initiated on August 19, 2019, through a Federal Register Request for Public Comments. The request and responses are available at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013. USTR developed the 2019 NML in coordination with the federal agencies represented on the Special 301 Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC). Information about Special 301 and other intellectual property-related processes and issues is available at https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/intellectual-property.
To assist U.S. right holders and consumers who confront IP infringement online, the U.S. Government continues to expand the tools available on https://www.stopfakes.gov, including by providing links to infringement reporting mechanisms at a number of popular online retailers and markets. Victims and interested parties may report IP theft and import violations to U.S. law enforcement agencies through https://www.stopfakes
FairContractingPractices.com
Fair Contracting Practices
AmazonAntitrustLawsuit.com
Amazon Antitrust Lawsuit
AmazonStolenGoods.com
Amazon Stolen Goods
AmazonEUAntitrust.com
Amazon EU Antitrust
AmazonBribery.com
Amazon Bribery
AmazonIllegalContent.com
Amazon Illegal Content
AmazonCriminalAntitrust.com
Amazon Criminal Antitrust
AmazonCorruption.com
Amazon Corruption
AmazonFalseAdvertising.com
Amazon False Advertising
AmazonClimateJustice.com
Amazon Climate Justice
AmazonMonopolyPower.com
Amazon Monopoly Power
AmazonClimateChange.com
Amazon Climate Change
AmazonConnections.com
Amazon Connections
AmazonNotoriousMarkets.com
Amazon Notorious Markets
AmazonLaws.com
Amazon Laws
AmazonAntitrustConspiracy.com
Amazon Antitrust Conspiracy
AmazonFakeReviews.com
Amazon Fake Reviews
AmazonInsiderTrading.com
Amazon Insider Trading
AmazonMarketDominance.com
Amazon Market Dominance
AmazonSexualHarassment.com
Amazon Sexual Harassment
AmazonRetaliation.com
Amazon Retaliation
AmazonSexism.com
Amazon Sexism
AmazonSocialJustice.com
Amazon Social Justice
AmazonRacism.com
Amazon Racism
AmazonDiscrimination.com
Amazon Discrimination
AmazonRacistGraffiti.com
Amazon Racist Graffiti
AmazonUnsafeConditions.com
Amazon Unsafe Conditions
AmazonFacialRecognition.com
Amazon Facial Recognition
AmazonUnethicalPractices.com
Amazon Unethical Practices
AmazonAntiCompetitive.com
Amazon Anti Competitive
AmazonCounterfeitProducts.com
Amazon Counterfeit Products
AmazonDefectiveProducts.com
Amazon Defective Products
AmazonInvests.com
Amazon Invests
AmazonClimateFoundation.com
Amazon Climate Foundation
AmazonPledges.com
Amazon Pledges
AmazonEarthPledge.com
Amazon Earth Pledge
AmazonClimateAction.com
Amazon Climate Action
AmazonClimateFund.com
Amazon Climate Fund
AmazonEarthFund.com
Amazon Earth Fund
AmazonVentureFund.com
Amazon Venture Fund
AmazonAerospace.com
Amazon Aerospace
AmazonSpaceForce.com
Amazon Space Force
AmazonPiracy.com
Amazon Piracy
AmazonPolicies.com
Amazon Policies
AmazonPolitics.com
Amazon Politics
AmazonPredatoryPricing.com
Amazon Predatory Pricing
AmazonPrinciples.com
Amazon Principles
AmazonPriceFixing.com
Amazon Price Fixing
AmazonShareholders.com
Amazon Shareholders
AmazonTrademarks.com
Amazon Trademarks
AmazonSportsCenter.com
Amazon Sports Center
AmazonHockeyCenter.com
Amazon Hockey Center
AmazonWhistleblowers.com
Amazon Whistleblowers
BezosMonopoly.com
Bezos Monopoly
BezosPhilanthropy.com
Bezos Philanthropy
ClimatePledgeFoundation.com
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.org
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.co
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.us
Climate Pledge Foundation
AntitrustConspiracy.com
Antitrust Conspiracy
AntitrustEnforcement.com
Antitrust Enforcement
Section230.co
Section 230
INFORMConsumersAct.org
Inform Consumers Act
ShopSafeAct2020.com
Shop Safe Act 2020
SANTAAct.com
SANTA Act
SuperiorCourt.us
Superior Court
DigitalMarketsAct.com
Digital Markets Act
ClimateLegislation.com
Climate Legislation
CivilRightsEnvoy.com
Civil Rights Envoy
CivilRightsPledge.com
Civil Rights Pledge
AClimatePledge.org
A Climate Pledge
ClimateFriendlyPledge.com
Climate Friendly Pledge
AntitrustConspiracy.com
Antitrust Conspiracy
NotoriousMarkets.com
Notorious Markets
ClimatePledgeFriendly.com
Climate Pledge Friendly
iNewsBureau.com
iNews Bureau
iClimatePledge.com
i Climate Pledge
AClimateChangeArena.com
A Climate Pledge Arena
AmericanIndians.co
American Indians
ItTakesAllofUs.org
It Takes All of Us
BlackLivesMatterPledge.com
Black Lives Matter Pledge
BlackLivesMatterPledge.org
Black Lives Matter Pledge
JusticePolicing.com
Justice Policing
InformConsumersAct.com
Inform Consumers Act
ShopSafeAmerica.org
Shop Safe America
AntiRacismPledge.com
Anti Racism Pledge
PreventClimateWarming.com
Prevent Climate Warming
RacialEqualityPledge.com
Racial Equality Pledge
SexualHarassmentPledge.org
Sexual Harassment Pledge
AmericansPledge.com
Americans Pledge
ClaytonAntitrustAct.us
Clayton Antitrust Act
RepealSection230.us
Repeal Section 230
GiftPledge.org
Gift Pledge
UnitedStatesConstitution.co
United States Constitution
ShermanAntitrust.com
Sherman Antitrust
ShermanAntitrustAct.us
Sherman Antitrust Act
AmericansClimatePledge.com
Americans Climate Pledge
AmericansClimatePledge.us
Americans Climate Pledge
AsiaClimateChange.com
Asia Climate Change
AClimatePledge.com
A Climate Pledge
AClimatePledge.us
A Climate Pledge
AClimatePledgeArena.com
A Climate Pledge Arena
AClimatePledgeArena.co
A Climate Pledge Arena
AClimatePledgeArena.us
A Climate Pledge Arena
ClimatePledgeArena.co
Climate Pledge Arena
ClimatePledgeArena.tv
Climate Pledge Arena
MedalofFreedom.us
Medal of Freedom
PresidentialMedalofFreedom.us
Presidential Medal of Freedom
CongressionalMedalofHonor.us
Congressional Medal of Honor
CongressionalGoldMedal.us
Congressional Gold Medal
MedalofValor.us
Medal of Valor
CitizensMedal.us
Citizens Medal
KoreanWar.us
Korean War
VietnamWar.us
Vietnam War
SpanishAmericanWar.co
Spanish American War
RevolutionaryWar.co
Revolutionary War
HistoricalDocuments.co
Historical Documents
HistoricalDocuments.us
Historical Documents
ClassActionLawsuits.us
Class Action Lawsuits
ClassActionLawsuits.co
Class Action Lawsuits
RestartAct.com
Restart Act
HumanTraffickingPledge.org
Human Trafficking Pledge
ClimateWarmingCrisis.com
Climate Warming Crisis
SocialJusticePledge.com
Social Justice Pledge
AClimatePledge.co
A Climate Pledge
ParisClimatePact.com
Paris Climate Pact
RacialJusticePledge.com
Racial Justice Pledge
ParisAgreementPledge.com
Paris Agreement Pledge
EarthClimatePledge.com
Earth Climate Pledge
ClimateWarmingPledge.com
Climate Warming Pledge
1stAmendment.co
1st Amendment
EarnItAct.com
EARN It Act
FirstAmendment.co
First Amendment
CleanEconomyAct.com
Clean Economy Act
PlanetClimatePledge.com
Planet Climate Pledge
ParisClimatePledge.com
Paris Climate Pledge
MeTooPledge.com
Me Too Pledge
MajorLeagueTelevision.com
Major League Television
EqualRightsPledge.com
Equal Rights Pledge
WorldClimatePledge.com
World Climate Pledge
ClimatePledgeCenter.com
Climate Pledge Center
ClimatePledgeHockey.com
Climate Pledge Hockey
ClimatePledgeSports.com
Climate Pledge Sports
SeattleClimateArena.com
Seattle Climate Arena
SeattleConcertArena.com
Seattle Concert Arena
SeattleSportsArena.com
Seattle Sports Arena
SeattleSportsCenter.com
Seattle Sports Center
SeattleSportsStadium.com
Seattle Sports Stadium
SeattleHockeyArena.com
Seattle Hockey Arena
SeattleHockeyCenter.com
Seattle Hockey Center
SeattleHockeyStadium.com
Seattle Hockey Stadium
SeattleIceCentre.com
Seattle Ice Centre
SeattleBasketballArena.com
Seattle Basketball Arena
SeattleBasketballCenter.com
Seattle Basketball Center
SeattleSportsTV.com
Seattle Sports TV
SeattleCenterSports.com
Seattle Center Sports
SeattleCenterHockey.com
Seattle Center Hockey
SeattleCenterStadium.com
Seattle Center Stadium
SeattleArenaSports.com
Seattle Arena Sports
SeattleArenaHockey.com
Seattle Arena Hockey
TheSeattleCenter.com
The Seattle Center
NorthgateHockeyArena.com
Northgate Hockey Arena
NorthgateHockeyCenter.com
Northgate Hockey Center
USCrimeLaw.com
US Crime Law
AudibleSucks.com
Audible Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonAWSSucks.com
Amazon AWS Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonCloudSucks.com
Amazon Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFreshGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Fresh Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFulfillmentSucks.com
Amazon Fulfillment Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGamesSucks.com
Amazon Games Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGoSucks.com
Amazon Go Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMarketplaceSucks.com
Amazon Marketplace Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMusicSucks.com
Amazon Music Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeSucks.co
Amazon Prime Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeVideoSucks.com
Amazon Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonSellersSucks.com
Amazon Sellers Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonStudiosSucks.com
Amazon Studios Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonTwitchSucks.com
Amazon Twitch Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonWebServiceSucks.com
Amazon Web Service Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AWSCloudSucks.com
AWS Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
ClimatePledgeArenaSucks.com
Climate Pledge Arena Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBTVSucks.com
IMDBTV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBSucks.co
IMDB Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.com
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.co
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheBlueOriginSucks.com
The Blue Origin Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheWashingtonPostSucks.com
The Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchTVSucks.com
Twitch TV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchSucks.co
Twitch Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashPostSucks.com
Wash Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashingtonPostSucks.co
Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WonderySucks.com
Wondery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsMarketSucks.com
Whole Foods Market Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsSucks.co
Whole Foods Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
Fair Contracting Practices
AmazonAntitrustLawsuit.com
Amazon Antitrust Lawsuit
AmazonStolenGoods.com
Amazon Stolen Goods
AmazonEUAntitrust.com
Amazon EU Antitrust
AmazonBribery.com
Amazon Bribery
AmazonIllegalContent.com
Amazon Illegal Content
AmazonCriminalAntitrust.com
Amazon Criminal Antitrust
AmazonCorruption.com
Amazon Corruption
AmazonFalseAdvertising.com
Amazon False Advertising
AmazonClimateJustice.com
Amazon Climate Justice
AmazonMonopolyPower.com
Amazon Monopoly Power
AmazonClimateChange.com
Amazon Climate Change
AmazonConnections.com
Amazon Connections
AmazonNotoriousMarkets.com
Amazon Notorious Markets
AmazonLaws.com
Amazon Laws
AmazonAntitrustConspiracy.com
Amazon Antitrust Conspiracy
AmazonFakeReviews.com
Amazon Fake Reviews
AmazonInsiderTrading.com
Amazon Insider Trading
AmazonMarketDominance.com
Amazon Market Dominance
AmazonSexualHarassment.com
Amazon Sexual Harassment
AmazonRetaliation.com
Amazon Retaliation
AmazonSexism.com
Amazon Sexism
AmazonSocialJustice.com
Amazon Social Justice
AmazonRacism.com
Amazon Racism
AmazonDiscrimination.com
Amazon Discrimination
AmazonRacistGraffiti.com
Amazon Racist Graffiti
AmazonUnsafeConditions.com
Amazon Unsafe Conditions
AmazonFacialRecognition.com
Amazon Facial Recognition
AmazonUnethicalPractices.com
Amazon Unethical Practices
AmazonAntiCompetitive.com
Amazon Anti Competitive
AmazonCounterfeitProducts.com
Amazon Counterfeit Products
AmazonDefectiveProducts.com
Amazon Defective Products
AmazonInvests.com
Amazon Invests
AmazonClimateFoundation.com
Amazon Climate Foundation
AmazonPledges.com
Amazon Pledges
AmazonEarthPledge.com
Amazon Earth Pledge
AmazonClimateAction.com
Amazon Climate Action
AmazonClimateFund.com
Amazon Climate Fund
AmazonEarthFund.com
Amazon Earth Fund
AmazonVentureFund.com
Amazon Venture Fund
AmazonAerospace.com
Amazon Aerospace
AmazonSpaceForce.com
Amazon Space Force
AmazonPiracy.com
Amazon Piracy
AmazonPolicies.com
Amazon Policies
AmazonPolitics.com
Amazon Politics
AmazonPredatoryPricing.com
Amazon Predatory Pricing
AmazonPrinciples.com
Amazon Principles
AmazonPriceFixing.com
Amazon Price Fixing
AmazonShareholders.com
Amazon Shareholders
AmazonTrademarks.com
Amazon Trademarks
AmazonSportsCenter.com
Amazon Sports Center
AmazonHockeyCenter.com
Amazon Hockey Center
AmazonWhistleblowers.com
Amazon Whistleblowers
BezosMonopoly.com
Bezos Monopoly
BezosPhilanthropy.com
Bezos Philanthropy
ClimatePledgeFoundation.com
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.org
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.co
Climate Pledge Foundation
ClimatePledgeFoundation.us
Climate Pledge Foundation
AntitrustConspiracy.com
Antitrust Conspiracy
AntitrustEnforcement.com
Antitrust Enforcement
Section230.co
Section 230
INFORMConsumersAct.org
Inform Consumers Act
ShopSafeAct2020.com
Shop Safe Act 2020
SANTAAct.com
SANTA Act
SuperiorCourt.us
Superior Court
DigitalMarketsAct.com
Digital Markets Act
ClimateLegislation.com
Climate Legislation
CivilRightsEnvoy.com
Civil Rights Envoy
CivilRightsPledge.com
Civil Rights Pledge
AClimatePledge.org
A Climate Pledge
ClimateFriendlyPledge.com
Climate Friendly Pledge
AntitrustConspiracy.com
Antitrust Conspiracy
NotoriousMarkets.com
Notorious Markets
ClimatePledgeFriendly.com
Climate Pledge Friendly
iNewsBureau.com
iNews Bureau
iClimatePledge.com
i Climate Pledge
AClimateChangeArena.com
A Climate Pledge Arena
AmericanIndians.co
American Indians
ItTakesAllofUs.org
It Takes All of Us
BlackLivesMatterPledge.com
Black Lives Matter Pledge
BlackLivesMatterPledge.org
Black Lives Matter Pledge
JusticePolicing.com
Justice Policing
InformConsumersAct.com
Inform Consumers Act
ShopSafeAmerica.org
Shop Safe America
AntiRacismPledge.com
Anti Racism Pledge
PreventClimateWarming.com
Prevent Climate Warming
RacialEqualityPledge.com
Racial Equality Pledge
SexualHarassmentPledge.org
Sexual Harassment Pledge
AmericansPledge.com
Americans Pledge
ClaytonAntitrustAct.us
Clayton Antitrust Act
RepealSection230.us
Repeal Section 230
GiftPledge.org
Gift Pledge
UnitedStatesConstitution.co
United States Constitution
ShermanAntitrust.com
Sherman Antitrust
ShermanAntitrustAct.us
Sherman Antitrust Act
AmericansClimatePledge.com
Americans Climate Pledge
AmericansClimatePledge.us
Americans Climate Pledge
AsiaClimateChange.com
Asia Climate Change
AClimatePledge.com
A Climate Pledge
AClimatePledge.us
A Climate Pledge
AClimatePledgeArena.com
A Climate Pledge Arena
AClimatePledgeArena.co
A Climate Pledge Arena
AClimatePledgeArena.us
A Climate Pledge Arena
ClimatePledgeArena.co
Climate Pledge Arena
ClimatePledgeArena.tv
Climate Pledge Arena
MedalofFreedom.us
Medal of Freedom
PresidentialMedalofFreedom.us
Presidential Medal of Freedom
CongressionalMedalofHonor.us
Congressional Medal of Honor
CongressionalGoldMedal.us
Congressional Gold Medal
MedalofValor.us
Medal of Valor
CitizensMedal.us
Citizens Medal
KoreanWar.us
Korean War
VietnamWar.us
Vietnam War
SpanishAmericanWar.co
Spanish American War
RevolutionaryWar.co
Revolutionary War
HistoricalDocuments.co
Historical Documents
HistoricalDocuments.us
Historical Documents
ClassActionLawsuits.us
Class Action Lawsuits
ClassActionLawsuits.co
Class Action Lawsuits
RestartAct.com
Restart Act
HumanTraffickingPledge.org
Human Trafficking Pledge
ClimateWarmingCrisis.com
Climate Warming Crisis
SocialJusticePledge.com
Social Justice Pledge
AClimatePledge.co
A Climate Pledge
ParisClimatePact.com
Paris Climate Pact
RacialJusticePledge.com
Racial Justice Pledge
ParisAgreementPledge.com
Paris Agreement Pledge
EarthClimatePledge.com
Earth Climate Pledge
ClimateWarmingPledge.com
Climate Warming Pledge
1stAmendment.co
1st Amendment
EarnItAct.com
EARN It Act
FirstAmendment.co
First Amendment
CleanEconomyAct.com
Clean Economy Act
PlanetClimatePledge.com
Planet Climate Pledge
ParisClimatePledge.com
Paris Climate Pledge
MeTooPledge.com
Me Too Pledge
MajorLeagueTelevision.com
Major League Television
EqualRightsPledge.com
Equal Rights Pledge
WorldClimatePledge.com
World Climate Pledge
ClimatePledgeCenter.com
Climate Pledge Center
ClimatePledgeHockey.com
Climate Pledge Hockey
ClimatePledgeSports.com
Climate Pledge Sports
SeattleClimateArena.com
Seattle Climate Arena
SeattleConcertArena.com
Seattle Concert Arena
SeattleSportsArena.com
Seattle Sports Arena
SeattleSportsCenter.com
Seattle Sports Center
SeattleSportsStadium.com
Seattle Sports Stadium
SeattleHockeyArena.com
Seattle Hockey Arena
SeattleHockeyCenter.com
Seattle Hockey Center
SeattleHockeyStadium.com
Seattle Hockey Stadium
SeattleIceCentre.com
Seattle Ice Centre
SeattleBasketballArena.com
Seattle Basketball Arena
SeattleBasketballCenter.com
Seattle Basketball Center
SeattleSportsTV.com
Seattle Sports TV
SeattleCenterSports.com
Seattle Center Sports
SeattleCenterHockey.com
Seattle Center Hockey
SeattleCenterStadium.com
Seattle Center Stadium
SeattleArenaSports.com
Seattle Arena Sports
SeattleArenaHockey.com
Seattle Arena Hockey
TheSeattleCenter.com
The Seattle Center
NorthgateHockeyArena.com
Northgate Hockey Arena
NorthgateHockeyCenter.com
Northgate Hockey Center
USCrimeLaw.com
US Crime Law
AudibleSucks.com
Audible Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonAWSSucks.com
Amazon AWS Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonCloudSucks.com
Amazon Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFreshGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Fresh Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFulfillmentSucks.com
Amazon Fulfillment Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGamesSucks.com
Amazon Games Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGoSucks.com
Amazon Go Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMarketplaceSucks.com
Amazon Marketplace Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMusicSucks.com
Amazon Music Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeSucks.co
Amazon Prime Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeVideoSucks.com
Amazon Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonSellersSucks.com
Amazon Sellers Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonStudiosSucks.com
Amazon Studios Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonTwitchSucks.com
Amazon Twitch Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonWebServiceSucks.com
Amazon Web Service Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AWSCloudSucks.com
AWS Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
ClimatePledgeArenaSucks.com
Climate Pledge Arena Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBTVSucks.com
IMDBTV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBSucks.co
IMDB Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.com
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.co
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheBlueOriginSucks.com
The Blue Origin Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheWashingtonPostSucks.com
The Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchTVSucks.com
Twitch TV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchSucks.co
Twitch Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashPostSucks.com
Wash Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashingtonPostSucks.co
Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WonderySucks.com
Wondery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsMarketSucks.com
Whole Foods Market Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsSucks.co
Whole Foods Sucks - NOT FOR SALE