[sschueller]

Amazon does an extremely poor job. There are items that are clearly counterfeit, review after review states it, yet the item is still available.

For example, there is a device called the "Split-Ender" which is only sold directly. The items is not sold on Amazon yet there are tons of fakes on Amazon [1]. The manufacture seems unable to get Amazon to remove them. Amazon doesn't even have to distinguish if the items is real or not in this case. The device should not be on Amazon, period.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3...

[ikeboy]

How do you know people aren't buying from the manufacturer or indirect sources (other countries, liquidation/clearance from stores, any number of other grey market sources) and reselling?

There are many items sold on Amazon that the manufacturer doesn't sell direct nor sell to sellers to sell direct, but somehow people still manage to get stock.

Amazon isn't going to take down a listing unless the manufacturer can prove that it's infringing. They will block specific sellers if you can show they're selling fakes, and it's not that hard to do (place a test order, then report).

[jacob019]

The manufacturer has no right to control the resale of their products.

[logfromblammo]

But if you only sell direct, and the product appears on Amazon at a lower price, it is blindingly obvious that the product on Amazon must either be counterfeit or stolen.

[rgbrenner]

Even assuming the manufacturer is refusing to negotiate lower prices with resellers..

The first sale doctrine protects your right to sell items that you've purchased... even if you want to price it at a loss.

Amazon, for example, sold ebooks at a loss for years. Obviously you wouldn't say Amazon's ebooks were counterfeit or stolen.

And Amazon does not have sole ownership of that tactic. Others have an equal right to sell items at a loss, even against the manufacturers wishes.

Other examples of when this occurs: going out of business sales; end of season liquidations; etc. and various reasons to liquidate inventory: bad buys; changing product categories; etc.

[lightedman]

Or, someone got the item as a gift and never wanted it. I've gotten tons of stuff for far cheaper than buying direct that way.

[ikeboy]

That doesn't apply when someone has a large quantity, though. Many of those sellers have thousands of feedback, unless they have a large number of friends, it's not from gifts.

[shimon_e]

Or it could be a money laundry operation?

[jlarocco]

If you had clicked the link, you would understand why that's not the case.

[lightedman]

If only you had bothered reading this little thread...

[nekopa]

Or second hand

[sschueller]

The manufacturer does not permit it.

Here is another example: Crestron, they specifically do not permit sales on Amazon, ebay etc. The only way to acquire their hardware is to go via a Crestron authorized dealer or becoming one yourself. Yet there is crestron hardware on Amazon...

The reason being is that their hardware requires programming and unless you are familiar with how it works you will have a very bad experience.

[wbl]

If the store closes shop and goes bankrupt, and the court orders the goods auctioned off, whoever buys them buys them. Heck, when you go to the store, you own the thing you buy and can do whatever the heck you want with it, including selling it.

[throwaw12ay]

Counterfeit products are destroyed, they are never auctioned. A court cannot order the auction of known counterfeit items, thats just crazy talk. And one cannot resell a counterfeit product, that's illegal.

[detaro]

They are talking about a seller of the original stuff, not about counterfeits.

It's possible that there are ways for the manufacturer to maintain control in case of an authorized seller's bankruptcy (e.g. not actually selling it to them until it's transferred to customer should work), but if they actually transfer it to them they only can demand contractual damages from them, not stop a buyer from doing anything with the product.

[drakenot]

Isn't this covered by first-sale doctrine?

[ryandrake]

What is stopping me from buying one of their (real) products, not wanting it anymore, and then selling it myself on Amazon or eBay? Surely you're not saying that it becomes counterfeit just because the manufacturer doesn't want me to sell it?

[ikeboy]

And how do you know authorized dealers aren't selling some on the side?

[sschueller]

Crestron will revoke your authorized dealer status if they catch you. This means, no access to firmware or any other software you will need.

[ikeboy]

I've heard plenty of stories of people buying merchandise with restrictions and selling it anyway. Sometimes they get caught, sometimes not.

I know of people manually removing serial numbers so the items can't be traced back to them. I know of people setting up multiple companies, selling from one to another and providing documentation that it wasn't "them" when caught. I've seen stories of people buying undelivered shipments from carriers and selling products found.

Point is, you can't assume everything is counterfeit just because the manufacturer doesn't sell to amazon sellers.

I've been threatened in the past by a manufacturer for selling their items: in that case, I had bought some from Amazon directly when the price was lower, and some from another authorized dealer. There are a lot of manufacturers that think their rights go a lot further than they actually do.

[tehwebguy]

For anyone wondering, banning resale is mostly a losing game.

They may not allow it, but they can almost never stop it without making a deal with Amazon.

[kevin_b_er]

They should not be called sales. That should be considered fraud or deception. You are renting it at their pleasure. You do not own any products by this company, they do. If the company uses the word "sale" anywhere consider them to be liars.

[edblarney]

"The manufacturer does not permit it."

I wonder if this is legal or possible.

I grasp that there are special cases, i.e. complex gear ...

But if you own a piece of gear outright - I don't think there is anything anyone can do to stop you from selling it to someone else.

Unless someone cares to comment ...

[tim333]

Amazon must be aware of that stuff and deliberately allow it. I'd question whether it benefits them though - I've kind of been put off buying there as it's hard to know what you'll get.

[tyingq]

It seems deliberate, as they seem to have a handle on not allowing counterfeits for big name designer goods (rolex, handbags, perfume, and so on). The counterfeits there seems to be mostly around electronics, household goods, and so on.

[wlesieutre]

I don't know if Birkenstock sandals qualify as "big name designer goods," but they definitely didn't have a handle on that.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/20/birkenstock-quits-amazon-in-u...

[paulmd]

Of the first page of items, I see exactly three items that include the phrase "split ender". What you are seeing could be attributed equally well to either a "fuzzy search" (people search "split ender", the search is converted to "split end remover" because that produces more relevant results) or Amazon's search being terrible (because there's a lot of things that are just generic beauty products there). Three items is not exactly a strong argument - but let's move on,

This is what it looks like when a trademark is in the process of becoming genericized. People search "kleenex" but what they actually want is "facial tissue", so you give fuzzy search results for it and people put it in their titles and so on.

Why should Amazon be the front line of protecting this company's trademark? Isn't their job to sell products, and the company's job to protect their trademark? If they think Amazon themselves are unfairly demeaning their trademark then go ahead and sue. Easy as that.

[digler999]

I wonder if people could form a "brigade" and buy all these products en-masse and simultaneously file for refunds, or request chargebacks (and show the CC co proof the product is counterfeit - which should solidify our case ) ?