Amazon exacts justice!

[Moviefan2k4]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

[Beastman1975]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

he pretty much admits he was buying multiple quantities of items amazon  had limit per husehold policies on. they wernt  controlling his decisions they simply dont want him taking advantage  of  limited sales multiple times via the different accounts.    i have no sympathy for him in the least cause he was most likely  just doin it to resell at higher prices depending on the rarity of the items , sure its not illegal  but sucks when you want to buy a game/system that just came out and everyones got them on ebay for xxx% more than retail

[sheep2001]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

Agree with this whole heatedly.  Amazon are a retailer,  they should not be getting involved in 'moral' issues.  If they don't want this practice happening, they should be investing in their own systems to limit purchases by address, or ip, or whatever.  The guy didn't break any laws, at the most they should have given him a warning that his practices were against t's and c's.  Shitting him down is hitting their own bottom line, and by not allowing him access to any credits, etc owed, is in itself bordering on the illegal.

I'm not saying I feel sorry for him,  and the guy himself said he wasn't after any sympathy,  but I do think the heavy handed tactics from amazon were unnecessary.

[Arseen]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

Agree with this whole heatedly.  Amazon are a retailer,  they should not be getting involved in 'moral' issues.  If they don't want this practice happening, they should be investing in their own systems to limit purchases by address, or ip, or whatever.  The guy didn't break any laws, at the most they should have given him a warning that his practices were against t's and c's.  Shitting him down is hitting their own bottom line, and by not allowing him access to any credits, etc owed, is in itself bordering on the illegal.

I'm not saying I feel sorry for him,  and the guy himself said he wasn't after any sympathy,  but I do think the heavy handed tactics from amazon were unnecessary.

But yes that was stupid from Amazon.
Especially if the dude is telling the truth and the accounts are really of 4 different persons.

[larryinc64]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

The reason Amazon has a because limit on the items is because the item is in short supply, and they do not want 1 person to horde all the copies. It's not just the items are more popular, its they want to make sure the item can be sold to the many who want it without them running out because one asshole wants to make a quick buck and take advantage of a shortage.
Imagine you want a Wii in 2006, and hear a store has a small supply, you go down there but can't get one because the guy in front of you bought all 20 of them to resell for profit. This is what they are trying to prevent.

He broke the rules of Amazon and now he is banned, I do think they should have warned him first, and canceled the order, and if he ever did it again he would get banned. It was not a serious offense.

[Retro Deckades]

Yep. Good for Amazon.

[Beastman1975]

actually alot of companies are doing similar things , they are tracking returns and such to prevent people from working the system, a guy i used to work with would get various dvds online and at different retailers  with high discounts then turn around and return them at wallmart for full price ( their return policy was really lax), eventually they banned him from doin returns  ( and he wasnt goin to just one store  ) .  and amazon isnt going to hurt their bottom line banning one guy  for buying multiple copies  of whatever,  if its a popular game its goin to sell regaurdless, i dont think they did for moral reasons either. mostlikely they dont want bad press like  namco-bandai is goin through with Ni no Kuni recently so they nip this in the bud when they catch it, could they have warned the guy? sure they could but im sure what he was doin is in the T&C somewhere and thats all the "warning" any service needs to give

[UncleBob]

The problem with this is that Amazon has also shut him out of all his digital accounts.

My wife has a Kindle Fire - if I was to lose my account (which I don't see happening, since I rarely order anything from them), she'd lose access to her entire digital library that we've paid real money for.  Amazon may be within their legal right, but that's a scary thing to think - hundreds of dollars worth of digital product, taken away with the click of a mouse.

[sheep2001]

actually alot of companies are doing similar things , they are tracking returns and such to prevent people from working the system, a guy i used to work with would get various dvds online and at different retailers  with high discounts then turn around and return them at wallmart for full price ( their return policy was really lax), eventually they banned him from doin returns  ( and he wasnt goin to just one store  ) .  and amazon isnt going to hurt their bottom line banning one guy  for buying multiple copies  of whatever,  if its a popular game its goin to sell regaurdless, i dont think they did for moral reasons either. mostlikely they dont want bad press like  namco-bandai is goin through with Ni no Kuni recently so they nip this in the bud when they catch it, could they have warned the guy? sure they could but im sure what he was doin is in the T&C somewhere and thats all the "warning" any service needs to give

I'm fully aware that closing one persons account, no matter how much they spend isn't going to hurt a business like amazon -  but the chances are they are doing this to more than just one account.  They closed 4 accounts in this case, 3 of which were genuine.  Closed him out of his digital purchases, etc, etc. if they have done this to a tiny proportion of their worldwide customer base,  let's say 1000 people, and shut down an average of 3000 valid accounts.  Word of mouth from those people alone, WILL hit the bottom line.  It's not going to put them it of business, but bad publicity spreads.  It's bad for amazon, and it's bad for digital distribution.

[wiggy]

OK, so some guy has multiple accounts for different family members, but they all ship to the same address, and Amazon shuts him down just because some items are more popular than others? That sounds really mean to me. If the guy payed the cash for his purchases, and didn't cause a ruckus, let him do what he wants. This sounds like another PC-infused "we want to control your decisons" situation.

Agree with this whole heatedly.  Amazon are a retailer,  they should not be getting involved in 'moral' issues.  If they don't want this practice happening, they should be investing in their own systems to limit purchases by address, or ip, or whatever.  The guy didn't break any laws, at the most they should have given him a warning that his practices were against t's and c's.  Shitting him down is hitting their own bottom line, and by not allowing him access to any credits, etc owed, is in itself bordering on the illegal.

I'm not saying I feel sorry for him,  and the guy himself said he wasn't after any sympathy,  but I do think the heavy handed tactics from amazon were unnecessary.

They do have a system in place.  They only allow one copy per customer in certain instances (sales, gift card promotions, etc.). This guy clearly cheated that system and that's why he was banned. It's not a "moral" issue at all. Amazon has a rule, he broke the rule and got caught, then got banned.

A LOT of people on CAG buy multiple copies of new stuff, even if it isn't to resell right away. If you look through the show off thread, there are many shelves which contain duplicates of a large number of the most popular limited/special/wasteofmoney editions. It seems like a lot of those people just sit on them as if they'll be worth millions in the future.

[Retro Deckades]

The problem with this is that Amazon has also shut him out of all his digital accounts.

My wife has a Kindle Fire - if I was to lose my account (which I don't see happening, since I rarely order anything from them), she'd lose access to her entire digital library that we've paid real money for.  Amazon may be within their legal right, but that's a scary thing to think - hundreds of dollars worth of digital product, taken away with the click of a mouse.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding this, UncleBob, but from what Amazon said to him, doesn't it sound like he can still access all of his Kindle content?

"If you are a Kindle customer, you can continue to access Kindle content in the Manage Your Kindle section of your account (www.amazon.com/manageyourkindle). To access other digital content, visit the Your Account page and click View Your Digital Orders (www.amazon.com/youraccount)."

[Dr.Agon]

...doesn't it sound like he can still access all of his Kindle content?

"If you are a Kindle customer, you can continue to access Kindle content in the Manage Your Kindle section of your account (www.amazon.com/manageyourkindle). To access other digital content, visit the Your Account page and click View Your Digital Orders (www.amazon.com/youraccount)."

his kindle stuff maybe accessable, but this (bolded) is impossible right?, since they closed his account?

[wiggy]

The problem with this is that Amazon has also shut him out of all his digital accounts.

My wife has a Kindle Fire - if I was to lose my account (which I don't see happening, since I rarely order anything from them), she'd lose access to her entire digital library that we've paid real money for.  Amazon may be within their legal right, but that's a scary thing to think - hundreds of dollars worth of digital product, taken away with the click of a mouse.

Why I never buy stuff like that.  They can take it from you without you even touching the device.  F that.

[Seraph Man]

Why I never buy stuff like that.  They can take it from you without you even touching the device.  F that.

He knew what he was doing wasn't allowed, and he got caught. End of story.

[wiggy]

^^^ Ew, that's total BS  (the Rock Band crap)