[flagged]
Fb marketplace takes inspiration from Craigslist which takes inspiration from newspaper classified ads.
If you went to a classified ad and bought a toaster or something and it was bunk, would you think about holding the newspaper accountable?
The issue isn't of quality, it's an issue of legality
The camera description specifically describes how it can be used for illegal purposes.
There's a huge difference between selling "stump remover" and "spouse poison" even if they're the same chemical.
They get rid of the word spy on the camera, amazon gets a fine and this will now this happen hidden under the surface. It's semantics. What's the real solution to hidden cameras that spy on victims undressing?
Semantics is half of what the legal system is. People spend years in court for what they meant in contract.
> They get rid of the word spy on the camera, amazon gets a fine and this will now this happen hidden under the surface. It's semantics. What's the real solution to hidden cameras that spy on victims undressing?
As I and others keep saying, it's much more than that. The issue wasn't that it said "spy" it's that the camera provides specific descriptions of how to use this camera illegally. I don't understand your need for "the real solution." There is no "real solution" to any human problem. We're never going to prevent this from happening at least once, but we can make iterative changes that make it harder and make it happen less frequently.
This is the key bit that makes it different from your examples.
>Tech legal expert Eric Goldman wrote that a victory for the plaintiff could be considered "a dangerous ruling for the spy cam industry and for Amazon," because "the court’s analysis could indicate that all surreptitious hook cameras are categorically illegal to sell." That could prevent completely legal uses of cameras designed to look like clothes hooks, Goldman wrote, such as hypothetical in-home surveillance uses.
How creative the amazon team has to be when reviewing the products. Do they have a duty that using the products in ways the seller has not written could achieve those goals. Personally I don't see non creepy uses for a bathroom towel camera. But in this case it is obvious that the one that must be sued is the person that used the camera. And suing amazon is obviously in bad faith and a money grab.
Simply put anyone coming after your product can submit a completely unrealistic set of abuses they could do with your product whereas your products normal uses may only cover a few particular tasks.
If you (the state) doesn't want a product on Amazon, you should be required to show meaningful evidence the product can both be harmful and is against the law to sell in your jurisdiction.
normal use of spycam -> spying.
normal use of beer bottle -> holding beer.
That's actually a poor argument if you want to get that level to detail.
Bottles are just bottles. The label and fluid you put in define if it's a beer bottle. The same bottle could be a soda bottle.
Again, coming back to cameras this will get problematic really fast. What if I just make a very small camera "for integration into other devices". I mean, sounds perfectly legal.
But if one of those devices is a clothes hook at which point to either of the products become illegal?
Someone should be in prison, but it isn't Sony, hitachi's or AT&T's fault when their products are used in this way.
If you make a camera as a towel hook you need to have good know your customer policies to ensure only legitimate porn producers buy it. The general public should buy concealed cameras that don't look like things that you would find in a bathroom thus making it more likely if used in a bathroom they are found.
Legit porn producers won't buy this for 2 reasons:
- The quality will be unusable for real porn
- The models know they're being filmed so there's no need to hide the camera. You can just put a real cam on the wall to simulate a hidden cam.
The likelihood of a towel rack spy camera being used for ill purposes is substantially higher than an SSD.
Your argument is like going "GHB and ibuprofen are both drugs!" and claiming they're the same as a result. No.
And for all the examples you gave: Facebook marketplace has safety features to try to prevent robberies. Gun shops do background checks to avoid selling to murderers.
The plaintiff didn't had any kind of interaction with amazon
And, while we're at it: eBay has listing policies which prohibit certain classes of items from being sold (including hidden cameras!), and will take down listings which violate them.
https://www.ebay.com/help/policies/prohibited-restricted-ite...