Hacker News Reader

If Amazon can profit off a listing then why shouldn't it be held liable for the damage caused due to the listing? If Amazon has already put up an agreement which frees them from liability then it sounds like, "Ok, I'll be with you in your good time but I'll walk away as soon as you have a misfortune" like an unfaithful life partner.

Of course, I know this is by design. But is it ethical?

View on HN

Shouldn't the liability be placed on the company actually selling the product through amazon? Amazon is a marketplace, not a manufacturer, in most cases I think

Amazon does profit off the listing is my assertion. Without Amazon, listing's ability to damage at scale is limited. Can't we argue that it is one of the partners in crime?

Amazon profits off of it, but so do the shipping companies and payment processors that helped sell the product and increase its sales. I don't think a platform that provides a service should be responsible for those that use the service, unless they explicitly claim responsiblity by saying they guarantee quality of their merchants or something. If amazon is responsible for the damage caused by their products, than so are places like Craigslist and eBay.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com