Amazon can no longer claim ignorance.
This is a double edged sword. In typical Amazon fashion, they will crank up the stupid bots and start taking down everything rather then actually fix the problem.
"The directive from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) covers more than 400,000 products, "
Honestly, I’m shocked the number is this low…
5 Likes
It MAY only cover FBA items
2 Likes
400,000 products, including faulty carbon monoxide detectors, hairdryers without electrocution protection and children’s sleepwear that violated flammability standards.
Amazon’s AI is only going to go after these that were specifically called out in the article though… so any mention of carbon, monoxide, detector, hairdryer, hair, dryer, sleepwear, sleep, wear. 
Killin’ ants:
3 Likes
When I started selling on Amazon back in 2008, there were extensive pages of recall information available to both buyers and sellers.
Within 2 years, the products had improved so much that there was no longer a need for any information on recalls (heh, heh).
I thought that was quite amazing and Amazon was likely to be bitten in the gluteous maximus in short order. I guess short order is only about 14 or 15 years as the government works.
Amazon will probably not try to enforce by bot. They will probably require every seller and listing provide a list of certifications and tests, even those which do not apply to the product.
This is likely to parallel the requirement for FCC RFI registrations for anything which has the word radio in the listing. They requested it for vintage issues of the Radio/Television Mirror magazine.
4 Likes
That’s certainly what the CPSC implies in its Press Release regarding today’s Decision and Order (link, CPSC, .pdf) - and that status is also specified in the last ¶ of page 1 (of 74) of said D&O:
ETA:
In the few minutes since I posted the link to that D&O (Docket No.:21-2), it appears that the CPSC has changed the afore-mentioned page 1 of the document - reducing the number of ¶'s on pg. 1 to two, and revising the above-quoted language to this:
4 Likes
Yep, cause FBA = Amazon is a distributor. FBM Amazon is NOT
2 Likes
Please disregard the ETA to my post, as I am mistaken.
The first quote above was taken from the CPSC’s Press Release itself, but the Docket document itself has not changed.
Mea culpa 
1 Like
LOL, From an Arstechnica article:
Now, Amazon must make a CPSC-approved plan to properly recall the dangerous products—including highly flammable children’s pajamas, faulty carbon monoxide detectors, and unsafe hair dryers that could cause electrocution—which the CPSC fears may still be widely used in homes across America.
While Amazon scrambles to devise a plan,…
Amazon needs to come up with an acceptable PoA. Wonder if they will use a template or pay a guru 
5 Likes
Whether or not the CPSC claim does not, I would expect the Amazon preventative solution will cover both FBM and FBA.
Amazon’s self interest would be best served that way.
3 Likes
Since the first sentence of the story says:
" Amazon.com … is responsible for the sale of hazardous third-party products on its platform," I think their attorneys will insist that EVERY type of seller will be covered and required to dance on hot coals.
"[quote=“Pepper_Thine_Angus, post:8, topic:4462, full:true”]
Yep, cause FBA = Amazon is a distributor. FBM Amazon is NOT
[/quote]
I can’t imagine any Government Agency NOT going for the most broadly interpreted chances at enforcement that they can when they named Amazon.com as the target.
That leads me to wonder about areas that I simply don’t do and have limited ‘knowledge’ about such as using any other Amazon services out there that have been touted as storage and shipping ‘solutions.’
The tentacles of enforcement can at least TRY to grab anything they can reach.
2 Likes
For fear of bringing politics onto this forum, I hesitate before saying that I am not aware of accusations of overreach against the CPSC.
The claim that Amazon is a distributor by the CPSC is definitely an interpretation of law that some would say is at least a reach.
A well disciplined regulator could decided to prefer to succeed rather than overreach and see their solution to a problem thrown out by the courts.
In need of a chance to say something positive about some part of the government, I will assume they would prefer to win rather than create earthquakes.
In many ways. FBA has similarities to a public warehouse. I do not believe a public warehouse would be a target of a similar action.
1 Like
I fear that this may even apply to me, an olde tyme bookseller. Amazon will, of course, do everything in its power to transfer liability.
Amazon will surely find that my products are a threat to give its customers lethal paper cuts, and require even greater insurance than they are currently requiring of many sub-10K/month sellers.
I dread the new AZ rules, when I first must prove that my product did not kill the customer.
Fortunately, I have nearly optimized the Amazon to eBay transfer process.
6 Likes
Indeed, I would expect Amazon to recover their costs and penalties from the offending sellers, should the government prevail.
4 Likes
Just saw this today…
2 Likes
There was also an article in the WSJ.
One can bet all sorts of sellers will be under incorrect recall: booksellers for pesticides and all the other idiocies that AMZ’s IT dept. has perpetrated in the last few years!! IF TPTB want an excuse to rid themselves of 3rd parties, this is it!!
3 Likes
So if I read the article right, when recalls were issued, Amazon contacted customers, told them to stop using the item, and issued refunds; but somehow it’s just asking too much for Amazon to include the word “recall” in the notice???
4 Likes
Also being discussed in Pep’s 073024 (30Jul2024) SAS thread here:
1 Like
im sure they will start asking for more certification documents as they’ve done with the button cells products.
I’m just hoping they don’t end up killing the few remaining products I am allowed to sell on the platform.
3 Likes