“R.itemList.length” “- this.config.text.ariaShown
“This.config.text.ariaFermé”
Amazon said conditionally a California bill that is strictly responsible for online markets for defective products after a California appeals court ruled that the company deserves to be subject to a higher point of liability.
“AB 3262 would extend this strict liability law for online markets,” Amazon policy guru Brian Huseman wrote in a blog post. “If adopted, corporations such as Amazon may be held liable for damages caused by parts sold through third-party distributors in Amazon.com. Array. If AB 3262 is amended so that all stores, adding online marketplaces, are subject to the same standards, Amazon is in a position to comply with this legislation.”
GERMAN WATCHDOG LAUNCHES INVESTIGATION ON THIRD-PARTY SELLER ON AMAZON
Nearly 60% of what sold on Amazon comes from third-party vendors, the company said.
The independent customer reporting organization said in June that it supported AB 3262 because “legislative action is needed to inspire online markets for those customers and ensure product protection to the same extent as physical stores.”
“Ensuring that platforms are strictly guilty of the defective products sold on their sites would solve the challenge of tracking defective product distributors on online platforms. It’s not simple to do so, in part because many distributors are outside the U.S. Or they have enough credentials,” the organization wrote.
Amazon won the California Court of Appeals’ unfavorable ruling in mid-August.
In a unanimous decision, Judge Patricia Guerrero of the Fourth District Court of Appeals wrote that “in accordance with established principles of objective liability, Amazon will be liable if a product sold on its online page turns out to be defective.”
AMAZON REDUCES DELIVERY CONTRACT JOBS WITH 7 COMPANIES
The ruling annulled an earlier ruling of a trial in favor of Amazon’s motion for abstract judgment.
However, the company can still appeal to the Golden State Supreme Court.
The case concerned a spare battery that Amazon customer Angela Bolger purchased from a Hong Kong-based company called Lenoge Technology; Lenoge Technology has been dubbed “E-Life” in Amazon’s online marketplace.
In his lawsuit against Amazon, Bolger claimed that “the battery exploded several months later and suffered severe burns as a result.”
While Bolger argued that Amazon would be guilty of the incident, Amazon argued that it was not guilty because it “did not distribute, manufacture, or sell the product.”
GET FOX’S BUSINESS ON THE ROAD BY CLICKING HERE
Fox Business’s request to Amazon was not returned without delay.
Julia Musto of Fox News contributed to the report.
CLICK HERE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT FOX BUSINESS
Related items
Mom fears after lack of $20,000 donations for service dog with autism
As more and more schools online, academics call for tuition cuts
Even with a harvest this year, American farmers are suffering