Again, I don’t disagree - but that’s the nature of the beast when it comes to legalese.
There’s an intricate, involved path, winding through both the ASBSA and other SHC pages related to IPR, that isn’t easy to follow - but it can be done by layfolk who try.
I think that you want Amazon to be something they will NEVER be – transparent.
I firmly believe that they purposefully write and create policies to be as vague and ‘fluid’ as possible so they can (and do) interpret them at will to fit whatever outcome they desire at the moment.
It is most likely in response to some ancient, long forgotten, situation where they had given clear and concise guidance on something and it somehow came back to bite them in their posterior portions.
I think we can all agree that IF they gave clear, exact information, some ‘creative’ sellers would find a way to screw both the public and Amazon.
Doing it the way they do gives them ‘creative license’ which suits their needs.
If only Bezos had been smart enough to know that he was getting outmaneuvered and outsmarted by Xi and the CCP when he decided to ‘open’ China to Amazon and was forced to open Amazon to China.
Of course, since it has made millions/billions for him I guess it’s of no concern to him.
Amazon avoids having to change its policies, a practice that could lead to legal action, by having vague policies and adapting the enforcement methods as necessary.
It has worked, so far.
And I predict that it will continue to work, in spite of any pending litigation.
As for that list of billionaires. Musk has managed to become the target of more government bureaucracies than Bezos. Of course, more of his wealth has come from his relationships with the government.
Arnualt’s wealth comes from providing status products to those with the power.