advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Amazon Chutzpa: Do Unto Others What You Block

December 14th, 2011

Take, for example, Ronald Kahlow, a software engineer from Reston, Va., who in 1997 walked into a Best Buy store that advertised it had the “lowest prices.” In the days before smartphones, Kahlow typed the prices into a laptop computer strapped to his waist. He was asked to leave the store, as a clerk removed the price tags so he couldn’t record them. When Kahlow returned the next day with a pad and paper, he was followed through the store and then arrested for trespass. Although he was acquitted in Fairfax County Court, the case illustrates the problem with capturing public pricing information in a way or for a reason that the retailer doesn’t want.

A retailer, as the owner of property, can put conditions on your use or presence at the store. Sort of: “If you want to shop here, you must agree not to capture the prices for commercial purposes.” If you violate these terms, you are trespassing, and can be arrested. Just as a club or concert arena may have a “no cameras” policy, a store could have a “no recording pricing” or “no sharing pricing” policy.

But to prosecute for trespass, you would have to show that the policy was well known, well advertised and that the customer was told their actions were unauthorized and could lead to their being banished. Not very likely. Indeed, many stores (including Best Buy) routinely send out their own “spies” to capture competitor’s pricing data. What Amazon did was to enlist its customers’ help. So, in essence, if there was a “trespass” it wasn’t by Amazon but by its customers. Pretty clever.

Now, if a brick-and-mortar store were to do the same thing to Amazon (either directly, by “bot” or by crowdsourcing), there would be an entirely different result. Access to Amazon’s Web site (which contains its pricing data) is restricted by its Terms of Use, which states:

Amazon grants you a limited license to access and make personal use of this site and not to download (other than page caching) or modify it, or any portion of it, except with express written consent of Amazon. This license does not include any resale or commercial use of this site or its contents; any collection and use of any product listings, descriptions, or prices; any derivative use of this site or its contents; any downloading or copying of account information for the benefit of another merchant; or any use of data mining, robots, or similar data gathering and extraction tools. This site or any portion of this site may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, visited, or otherwise exploited for any commercial purpose without express written consent of Amazon. (Emphasis added.)

Sauce for the goose?


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.