this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
1487 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

81869 readers
4738 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
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 day ago (3 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 11 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

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.

[–] SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

They are doing exactly that for a sometimes hefty markup. I got something like that with a gift receipt, so ultra lazy, looked up the item and it was $11 cheaper. Like that totally defeats the purpose of going elsewhere.

I reported the seller then returned it.

[–] swampdownloader@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

Go figure the margins are that thin.

[–] ramasses@social.ozymandias.club 2 points 16 hours ago

Use vercel instead

/s

[–] pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

You would basically have to convince a few hundred million people to not use the internet for months at a time with out a single percentage of them breaking the boycott to actually even start to hit aws.

Countless things have to start failing before aws even starts to feel it since it's not a consumer product. You basically have the drive all the companies using it to near bankruptcy so they can't afford to pay for aws anymore.

[–] pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works 1 points 18 hours ago

Frustrating, but I appreciate your answer; thank you.