
The Amazon Transparency Program Is a Counterfeiter's Worst Nightmare - deegles
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kirimasters/2019/01/03/the-amazon-transparency-program-is-a-counterfeiters-worst-nightmare/#77d3c85776aa
======
dmwallin
So create a system that encourages abuse, profit from that abuse at the
expense of brands, and then charge those companies to use your proprietary
tracking system if they want to eliminate it? This is straight out of a
racketeering playbook, "It would be a shame if someone counterfeited your
products and ruined your brand..."

This is Amazon's problem and they should be responsible and accountable for
this.

This article is low quality and reads like it's straight out of Amazon's PR
team, with no actual analysis.

~~~
papreclip
I don't think I fully understand your perspective. Aside from simply offering
a marketplace on which people may sell various products, what has Amazon done
to encourage abuse?

~~~
dragontamer
> what has Amazon done to encourage abuse?

Co-mingling of products at the warehouse. When you buy from Amazon, you don't
actually know which "seller" is supplying the goods. They all were comingled
at the Warehouse.

Even "Sold by Amazon" and "Fufilled by Amazon" products are comingled. Leading
to:
[https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225](https://twitter.com/billpollock/status/1183094406573748225)

Amazon, instead of fixing the comingling problem, has decided to charge the
legitimate companies (ex: No Starch Press) for anti-counterfeiting defenses.
Amazon is destroying No Starch Press's reputation by shipping shoddy low-
quality counterfeit books, but its No Starch Press who has to pay the price to
fix the problem.

~~~
mrandish
Yes, as a heavy user of Amazon and (I think) a pretty savvy consumer of their
site, commingling of different seller's offerings under one ASIN number causes
big issues for me.

Almost as bad is Amazon allowing resellers to combine "similar" products into
the same listing. While this makes sense for functionally equivalent products
such as color differences, it's now used all the time for products that are
substantially different. For example, mixing the ratings of a Micro-USB wall
charger with a USB-C Power Delivery-capable wall charger is not only useless
but misleading. They look different, work differently and use completely
different parts internally.

I really wish Amazon would stop this.

------
Jamwinner
I hope they rush this. They are already a retailer I systematically avoid,
dispite being a prime member, when authenticity matters. When I have time I
ocassionally gamble, but have been less and less successful getting authentic
items as time passes. Even if you dislike amazon (i am personally, torn),
getting this right benefits everyone selling things online if it proves
practical to implement.

~~~
gketuma
This is the reason why I cancelled my Prime account. I could not trust the
electronics I buy on Amazon. Too many fake items sourced directly from
shenzhen. Now I go directly to the manufacturer's website and pay full price
(which is usually about $10 more), and at least I know I'm getting the real
thing.

~~~
skuthus
What are you buying that you have had issues with?

~~~
dylan604
I've had fake DSLR camera batteries, Headphones, USB cables, and the list goes
on

------
asah
Seems like any e-commerce aggregator (e.g. eBay, craigslist, etc) has the same
counterfeiting problem - at least Amazon is offering a solution.

~~~
kube-system
I don't have the same magnitude of issues on eBay as I have had on Amazon.
Much of the problem is exacerbated their commingled inventory and consolidated
product pages.

On eBay it is two clicks to see the negative feedback for the seller who is
shipping me the item, and I have the confidence that I am going to get the
item from that seller.

On Amazon, users post much of the negative feedback on the consolidated
product page which doesn't give any indication about the seller, and might not
even be for the right product. And in the end, fungible FBA inventory is a
roll of the dice. This is a problem that never existed on eBay.

------
x0x0
I struggle to see why a brand would be willing to share sensitive sales data
with Amazon as this program requires. How many units produced, and production
times.

Amazon already uses every scrap if data they get too compete, including via
their expanding house brands

~~~
asah
Sorry for the dumb question, why wouldn't amazon already have this? how does
this share a brand's non-Amazon channel volumes? e.g. sales volume on their
own website, retail, etc.

~~~
x0x0
transparency requires a per-unit sticker with a unique code. Brands do not
generally share exact volumes _per product_ or their production rates.

~~~
xyzzy_plugh
Couldn't they be per-unit shipped/sold on Amazon? Does the brand need to use
the same unique code system in, for example, their own brick & mortar
location?

~~~
amazinzay
From the article: "Brands are required to put Transparency codes on every unit
for every SKU that’s enrolled, whether it’s sold on Amazon or through another
channel."

Amazon doesn't want companies to use this to prevent third parties from
selling their products obtained via other channels through Amazon by claiming
they are counterfeit, and so requires all products to contain the code, not
just those sold through Amazon.

edit: spelling

~~~
gamblor956
What Amazon wants and what the brands will actually do are two separate
things...

Many brands will just print the transparency codes for units destined for
Amazon through proper channels...which will be designated by having their own
SKU, like brands already do for Costco and Walmart sales.

Product sold through other channels will not have the transparency codes and
will be presumed counterfeit.

------
donarb
This sounds like a good idea if major product producers could join together to
create a standard for labeling all consumer goods. This could be used to
identify food packages for recalls.

------
chance_state
So not only does Amazon co-mingle inventory to cause this problem in the first
place, but then they turn around and charge brands if they want to enter this
anti-counterfeit program. Incredible.

~~~
Nasrudith
That is quite the inversion of burden of proof there. Amazon is a marketplace
in the first place as opposed to a portal of stores. They sell by product.
They have no obligation to do otherwise or to bar all secondary sellers. It is
a privledge in the first place and they are entitled to demand that it not be
used to shut out secondary markets.

~~~
chance_state
>They have no obligation to do otherwise or to bar all secondary sellers.

Even secondary sellers of counterfeit goods? Of course they are.

------
wiradikusuma
Or, why don't a 3rd party provide this, and provide a website
isthislegit.com/THERANDOMID (typing or API or QR) that returns red or green?
Hey, startup idea!

~~~
anteatersa
The code has to be logged at Amazon warehouse though so it can linked to your
amazon account number. Manufacturer -> Distributor -> Customer. Otherwise I
could buy one real product off Amazon, copy the code onto my fake product and
sell on Amazon marketplace.

------
quantified
How long until the first substantial successful subversion of this? (Success
defined as >USD 100K of sales, or destruction of >10K of a competitor's goods)

How long until it's made public?

