It looks like they may have 44% of internet retail by public companies; and that's big, but it doesn't include private companies, and it doesn't fit my definition of a monopoly. It is certainly large enough that they should be scrutinized and attempts to increase share through prohibited practices should result in enforcement actions.
My point is meant to compare antitrust enforcement to the other mechanisms that are viewed by some as necessary to prevent large corporations from causing negative externalities.
Arguably if proper antitrust enforcement had been done in the finance industry, then no firms would have become too big to fail and all of the perverse incentives underscored by regulators post 2008 could have been avoided.
The problem is that since our regulatory state rewards size, there is a strong incentive to become large and hence too big to fail. As Amazon becomes a bigger and bigger part of the economy, it could start using the same rent-seeking tactics that financial firms used in 2008 to get major corporate welfare.
Amazon needs to take full responsibility for counterfeiting. I'm tempted to charge back certain purchases instead of going through the normal highly annoying process.
Being able to return an item no questions asked is not an appropriate remedy for getting a counterfeit product. It's a major hassle to box something back up and return it, and Amazon does not have a good solution for situations when the product that arrives is completely broken or is total junk/DOA.
Joining a class action lawsuit usually takes no action at all, but some action is required to opt-out.
So you've basically just said your been burned enough to do precisely nothing about it.
Now, if you were willing to initiate a lawsuit, whether class- or direct-action, that would be saying something meaningful.
The recent upsurge of counterfeit products are evidence that Amazon is abusing its market power to the point of harming consumers.