Re:Amazon argues it’s not liable for product that severely i...
by kazinator on Friday March 26, 2021 @12:21PM
(#26593911)
> Amazon argued yesterday before the Texas Supreme Court that it should not be held liable for defective products sold through its site.
Is this east Texas, where patent trolls can buy judges? :)
> The toddler’s mother purchased the knockoff Apple TV remote from a third-party seller called “USA Shopping.” After the battery burned her daughter, she sought to find out who was behind the Amazon storefront, discovering that it was run by one “Hu Xi Jie” out of Shenzhen, China. Neither the mother nor Amazon has been able to locate or contact Hu Xi Jie.
Amazon 150% liable. They know they have this problem and have had it for years, yet they continue to allow foreign operators to pose as local, and to misrepresent their origin and the authenticity of products.
Is this east Texas, where patent trolls can buy judges? :)
> The toddler’s mother purchased the knockoff Apple TV remote from a third-party seller called “USA Shopping.” After the battery burned her daughter, she sought to find out who was behind the Amazon storefront, discovering that it was run by one “Hu Xi Jie” out of Shenzhen, China. Neither the mother nor Amazon has been able to locate or contact Hu Xi Jie.
Amazon 150% liable. They know they have this problem and have had it for years, yet they continue to allow foreign operators to pose as local, and to misrepresent their origin and the authenticity of products.