[ARussell]

I'm not GP. I didn't make that argument. I agree that Amazon is not obliged to allow just anyone on their platform. Sellers must abide by the rules that Amazon sets in place. At the same time, Amazon must abide by the laws of the locations at which it wants to sell. So if a state says that they cannot force a seller to keep their lowest price on Amazon, then that's the way it is.

[endisneigh]

> So if a state says that they cannot force a seller to keep their lowest price on Amazon, then that's the way it is.

Yes, but at the end of the day Amazon to remove the seller for any reason, so even if the FTC succeeds here, Amazon will simply purge those sellers who are not offering the best price, even if not explicitly stated.

There is no reality where Amazon allows their site to be inundated with higher priced goods compared to competitors.

[ARussell]

Perhaps you are right, and also then again perhaps those companies find that they have cause to file a lawsuit.

[scarface_74]

There has been a a standard of “no duty to deal” forever. No company is forced to do business with anyone.

[throwaway14356]

with astronomic fines (for the customers to pay)

[brewdad]

Why not? If I'm willing to pay Amazon $6 for an item I could get for $5 at Walmart, why wouldn't Amazon want to make that sale?

[throwaway14356]

it would be sensible to require a reason for refusing to do business with someone. Normally it wouldn't be but if you are a repeat offender it seems a sensible requirement

[endisneigh]

Unless it's a protected class you can refuse to do business with anyone for any reason. Plenty of supreme court cases on this.

[throwaway14356]

certainly, you can write anything on the form. Any reason is not without? I do doubt you can refuse one foo for being fooish but not the other. Now multiply by 10 000 and pretend you are explaining it to the judge in a context where you've been convicted multiple times.