Amazon staffers took bribes, manipulated marketplace, leaked data including search algorithms – DoJ claims US prosecutors claim six people bribed corrupt Amazon insiders to rig the the web giant's Marketplace in their favor and leak terabytes of data including some search algorithms. Amazon’s digital bazaar is open to third parties who can push their products on the e-commerce giant’s store, and even have Amazon do their deliveries …
Pay the people better and they may be not tempted by bribery.
Something's rotten on Amazon Marketplace: I made a bad review on a sh*tty product on Amazon. 2 weeks later, I received several mails from the 3P shop asking me to remove my review in exchange of a few cash. I refused and contacted several times Amazon to ask them if bribery was a standard practice on Marketplace. I never got a relevant answer from Amazon.
It's supposed to be an immediate dismissal from the Marketplace to offer bribes to remove Reviews (just like its supposed to be for fake reviews).
I've had success reporting fake reviews, but I've never been offered cash for removing a review, so cant comment there. But probably, this is a case of if you got in contact with the right people things would have happened, but often (as with any big organisation) finding the right people is like pulling hens teeth!
Oh well at least you tried. :)
Pay the people better and they may be not tempted by bribery.
I don't disagree that people should be paid a living wage, but it is a fallacy to believe that crime is linked to need, except for the most dire poverty and even then it is rare. I've known plenty of poor people who are completely honest, and more than a few quite wealthy people who aren't.
I don't think that 45mil savings - or cost to Tower Hamlets as it might be better described - worked out. Many of Richard Desmond's other bribes have though. I wonder what his total ratio is by now. And is total ratio even the correct way to measure this given that financial success from bribery can be used to fund further bribery, implying that earlier success is more important than later success?
While Amazon are looking for dusty corners that need cleaning up, perhaps they could remove all the pages of items that ' are no longer available and don't know whennor if they will ever be in stock'. Searching for items via google or duck duck go often comes up with said item on Amazon.de only to find it no longer available but suggestions for a range if crap that isn't even vaguely similar.
Click bait that is wasting my time, it happens so often that I no longer bother with Amazon at all, aside from the fact prices on there are usually higher.
I find the old amazon listings useful (along with the reviews). It means the thing you seek exists and can often provide clues to help you find whatever lowly store is still selling it but hasn't given Google enough money to tell you so.
There was a time Amazon items didn't appear in Google results. I assume Big G is getting a lovely revenue stream from Amazon now and everyone is cosy again.
A good example why those ginormous companies with their tentacles everywhere are simply too dangerous. Too few have too much power. Antitrust should not only look at the consumer prices, but at the market distorting power too. To create consumer, you need first people who earn enough money to be one. In a distorted market, customers will disappear.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
