Attorney General Karl Racine of Washington, D.C., has filed a lawsuit against Amazon claiming that it breaks antitrust laws by artificially inflating prices and discouraging competition.
The lawsuit claims that Amazon abuses its wide control over the online retail market by forcing third-party sellers to offer products at lower prices on Amazon than they do elsewhere — even on their own websites — and then charging the sellers as much as 40 percent of the product’s price in fees. This causes prices to be inflated across the board, according to the lawsuit.
“Amazon has used its dominant position in the online retail market to win at all costs. It maximizes its profits at the expense of third-party sellers and consumers, while harming competition, stifling innovation, and illegally tilting the playing field in its favor,” said Racine in a statement.
Amazon controls between 50 to 70 percent of the online retail market, Racine says, so sellers will often turn to the website to sell their products. But the company is creating an “anticompetitive” environment by indirectly controlling prices set by third-party sellers, according to the lawsuit.
“We filed this antitrust lawsuit to put an end to Amazon’s illegal control of prices across the online retail market. We need a fair online marketplace that expands options available to District residents and promotes competition, innovation, and choice,” Racine continued.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) praised the lawsuit, tweeting, “Many small businesses feel like they have to sell their products on Amazon for their survival – but Amazon abuses its size and power to bleed them dry. I’m glad the District of Columbia is fighting back.”
Many small businesses feel like they have to sell their products on Amazon for their survival – but @amazon abuses its size and power to bleed them dry. I’m glad the District of Columbia is fighting back. https://t.co/1JuSpkplY2
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) May 26, 2021
As Wired reported, Amazon stops listing third-party sellers on competitive sections of their webpages if sellers offer lower prices on other e-commerce sites like Walmart, leading to dramatic declines in sales for those sellers.
“Because of its size and strength, and because sellers can’t keep their prices low on their own channels, Amazon is literally inflating the entire online economy,” former Amazon seller Jason Boyce told Wired.
Amazon had previously had a “price parity” provision that stopped sellers from offering lower prices elsewhere. The practice came under enough scrutiny in the U.S. that the company dropped it in 2019. But Racine and sellers said that the practice never went away — the company just replaced it with a similar policy with the same name.
The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday, is one of several antitrust lawsuits from states and the federal government filed against large tech companies over the past year. Though the suit was filed in D.C., it echoes complaints about the company from the rest of the country.
Antitrust claims can be hard to prove, but The New York Times reported that Tim Wu, scholar and influential big tech critic, pointed to claims over the company’s pricing mechanisms as the best way to go after Amazon on an antitrust front. The Biden administration also appears to be prepared to take on big tech monopolies with Wu as an National Economic Council adviser and Lina Khan, progressive antitrust champion, on the Federal Trade Commission.
“This suit is another indication that the tide is shifting — both policymakers and the public want Amazon’s outsized power to be curtailed,” Stacy Mitchell, Institute for Local Self Reliance co-director, a technology nonprofit and advocacy group, told Recode.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.