this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
11 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

82227 readers
4535 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

California Attorney General Rob Bonta last night filed a request for a preliminary injunction in California’s existing case against Amazon for price fixing. Attorney General Bonta’s 2022 lawsuit alleged that the company stifled competition and caused increased prices across California through its anticompetitive policies in order to avoid competing on price with other retailers. New evidence paints a clearer and more shocking picture. The motion for a preliminary injunction comes after a robust discovery process where California uncovered evidence of countless interactions in which Amazon, vendors, and Amazon’s competitors agree to increase and fix the prices of products on other retail websites to bolster Amazon’s profits. Time and again, across years and product categories, Amazon has reached out to its vendors and instructed them to increase retail prices on competitors’ websites, threatening dire consequences if vendors do not comply. Vendors, bullied by Amazon’s overwhelming bargaining leverage and fearing punishment, comply — agreeing to raise prices on competitors’ websites (often with the awareness and cooperation of the competing retailer), or to remove products from competing websites altogether. Amazon’s goal is to insulate itself from price competition by preventing lower retail prices in the market at the expense of American consumers who are already struggling with a crisis of affordability.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 point 1 week ago (4 children)

There was a time when Amazon was not full of scummy rip-off products, when it was not playing games with prices, when it was not a cloud-computing powerhouse, and you know what happened?

That's right, they crushed their adversaries (retail shopping) and earned billions in profits. They won.

But somehow that's not enough winning, there isn't enough winning until all the value has been vacuumed up from the world.

[–] MnemonicBump@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Bezos explicitly undercut the competition for years to drive all of the competition out of business. Amazon took as much time from 1997-2016 to make as much profit as they did in 2017, which is also (not) coincidentally when they hit peak market saturation and were able to start raising their prices.

So what you're talking about was real, but it wasn't like, "back when Amazon was good", they were just preparing for what they are now. Having a huge monopoly on just about everything has always been their win condition, and they're no where near done winning.

[–] octobob@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 week ago

Yeah. It's the same thing Uber did with pushing cab services out of business.

Not only that, but AWS is the real money maker for them. Not that retail and gaming and prime and whatever don't also make boat loads of cash, but it doesn't even graze AWS. The scale of these data centers is unreal and most of the internet runs on AWS.

I'm an industrial electrician with background on what they're ordering and installing in terms of control panels and if you saw the weekly shipments it'd make you sick. And we're only one supplier, they have others.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

And that is why I no longer buy anything from them. I'm just embarrassed it took me as long as it did to realize what they were really doing.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

The frustrating thing is we can't boycott AWS since so many of the sites we use run on it. But yes, we absolutely shouldn't buy things through Amazon or any of the other web stores Amazon owns.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

we absolutely shouldn't buy things through Amazon or any of the other web stores Amazon owns.

I try to use eBay as an alternative, though i find every 3-4 orders i place there, i get one in an Amazon box that by all rights appears to have been shipped by Amazon. I swear people are drop-shipping stuff from Amazon to their eBay buyers.

They are. If it has free returns and thousands of feedback it’s probably a drop shipper. Return it and use the eBay label it ends up costing them money.

[–] pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

I have often wondered whether targeted internet boycott days would shake up AWS, but I don't know enough about their billing structure to run the numbers to see how much that would dig into AWS profits + how much of their income is flat subscription fees vs. billing on number of calls and haven't had a chance to dig into it yet.

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

The government, use the government. It’s our last chance to use the government to regulate corporations before they become the government

[–] pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 child)

I am a big believer in regulation, and some governments right now are in a position where they can be pressured to take anti-monopoly action against Amazon, which I want very much to see. Being in the U.S. as I am right now, though... There are some state governments I would like to see act (and shout-out to California for doing so here), but I am also brainstorming other nonviolent disruptive action which could be taken, because the federal government right now is actual fascists and Amazon is in league with them.

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago

I was hoping last years shenanigans would have pushed Europe away from our tech companies. I don’t see much hope unless we can elect a new Congress that is willing to do Monopoly busting across the board.

The other commenters here are right about Amazon's initial methods, but I'm also going to highly recommend Cory Doctorow's Enshittification for a detailed explanation of how this happens (including a breakdown on Amazon specifically) and what to do about it.

[–] Entropy_Pyre@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 week ago

To quote a favorite singer of mine,

You could fill a man with gold, and still have room for greed.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 1 point 1 week ago

It's easy to crush the competition when you purposely take a loss as an investment in future market share.