Amazon Earth Pledge
Amazon Notorious Markets
Amazon Notorious Markets - A Company That Facilitates Illegal Counterfeits and Piracy
Did Jeff Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon,
lie under oath to the United States Congress? Let’s find out!
lie under oath to the United States Congress? Let’s find out!
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos testified under oath to United States Congress that they sell 'Stolen Goods'
Is Amazon a "Criminal Enterprise" disguised as an e-commerce shopping website to take advantage of the general populace by "Price Fixing" for the express purpose of driving the competition out of business so Amazon will then have a true monopoly so huge that they can increase their prices exponentially at will when the consumer has very few other choices of where to purchase their goods?
The United States Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, chastised Jeff Bezos personally, along with Amazon the company, for numerous inappropriate transgressions and potential illegal activities time and time again of which most of the letters sent to them regarding their unethical behavior are contained within this website. It appears that neither Jeff Bezos nor any of the other Amazon executives are able to comprehend the gravity of their misdeeds and how those actions negatively impact their loyal customers and their dedicated employees.
If this organization can’t get their act together and discontinue their abhorrent behavior then maybe it’s time that Congress creates significant restraints and severely limit their ability to partake in activities that harm others.
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.
The United States Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, chastised Jeff Bezos personally, along with Amazon the company, for numerous inappropriate transgressions and potential illegal activities time and time again of which most of the letters sent to them regarding their unethical behavior are contained within this website. It appears that neither Jeff Bezos nor any of the other Amazon executives are able to comprehend the gravity of their misdeeds and how those actions negatively impact their loyal customers and their dedicated employees.
If this organization can’t get their act together and discontinue their abhorrent behavior then maybe it’s time that Congress creates significant restraints and severely limit their ability to partake in activities that harm others.
The Sherman Act outlaws "every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade," and any "monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize." Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are "per se" violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed.
More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries back 'Make Amazon Pay' campaign
LONDON, Dec 3, 2020 (Reuters) - More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries have signed a letter to Amazon.com Inc boss Jeff Bezos backing a campaign that claims the tech giant has “dodged and dismissed … debts to workers, societies, and the planet,” organisers said.
The “Make Amazon Pay” campaign was launched on Nov. 27 - the annual Black Friday shopping bonanza - by a coalition of over 50 organisations, with demands including improvements to working conditions and full tax transparency.
The letter’s signatories include U.S. Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, former UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and Vice President of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala, co-convenors Progressive International and UNI Global Union said.
“We urge you to act decisively to change your policies and priorities to do right by your workers, their communities, and our planet,” the letter said.
“We stand ready to act in our respective legislatures to support the movement that is growing around the world to Make Amazon Pay.”
Amazon, the world’s biggest retailer, has faced criticism for its tax practices before, including in the UK and the EU. It says its profits remain low given retail is a highly competitive, low margin business and it invests heavily.
It said on Thursday that while it accepted scrutiny from policymakers, many of the matters raised in the letter stemmed from misleading assertions.
“Amazon has a strong track record of supporting our employees, our customers, and our communities, including providing safe working conditions, competitive wages and great benefits,” it said, adding it was “paying billions of dollars in taxes globally.”
Amazon grew rapidly during the pandemic, with sales soaring as restrictions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus closed bricks-and-mortar shops and sent consumers online.
Governments worldwide are considering tougher rules for big tech to assuage worries about competition.
The European Union, for example, last month charged Amazon with damaging retail competition, alleging it used its size, power and data to gain an unfair advantage over smaller merchants that sell on its online platform.
Amazon disagreed with the EU assertions, saying it represented less than 1% of the global retail market and there were larger retailers in every country in which it operated.
LONDON, Dec 3, 2020 (Reuters) - More than 400 lawmakers from 34 countries have signed a letter to Amazon.com Inc boss Jeff Bezos backing a campaign that claims the tech giant has “dodged and dismissed … debts to workers, societies, and the planet,” organisers said.
The “Make Amazon Pay” campaign was launched on Nov. 27 - the annual Black Friday shopping bonanza - by a coalition of over 50 organisations, with demands including improvements to working conditions and full tax transparency.
The letter’s signatories include U.S. Congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, former UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and Vice President of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala, co-convenors Progressive International and UNI Global Union said.
“We urge you to act decisively to change your policies and priorities to do right by your workers, their communities, and our planet,” the letter said.
“We stand ready to act in our respective legislatures to support the movement that is growing around the world to Make Amazon Pay.”
Amazon, the world’s biggest retailer, has faced criticism for its tax practices before, including in the UK and the EU. It says its profits remain low given retail is a highly competitive, low margin business and it invests heavily.
It said on Thursday that while it accepted scrutiny from policymakers, many of the matters raised in the letter stemmed from misleading assertions.
“Amazon has a strong track record of supporting our employees, our customers, and our communities, including providing safe working conditions, competitive wages and great benefits,” it said, adding it was “paying billions of dollars in taxes globally.”
Amazon grew rapidly during the pandemic, with sales soaring as restrictions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus closed bricks-and-mortar shops and sent consumers online.
Governments worldwide are considering tougher rules for big tech to assuage worries about competition.
The European Union, for example, last month charged Amazon with damaging retail competition, alleging it used its size, power and data to gain an unfair advantage over smaller merchants that sell on its online platform.
Amazon disagreed with the EU assertions, saying it represented less than 1% of the global retail market and there were larger retailers in every country in which it operated.
The Laws governing the American people are derived from the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights which includes one of the most important, the First Amendment, allowing Free Speech which means we can all speak our voices without fear of prosecution.
This website is a repository to disseminate and publish important information regarding any potentially illegal or unethical activities by the leadership management of the Amazon (dot com) Inc. organization and will be constantly updated as facts become known and available.
Amazon is Notorious for being involved with intolerable actions within its ranks and the company should be broken up into numerous different and smaller parts or eliminated completely due to them allowing despicable acts to occur and Amazon has been accused by several governmental agencies for deplorable activities such as Anti Competitive Business, Antitrust Concerns, Bribery, Counterfeit Products, Defective Products, Discrimination, Fake Product Reviews, Illegal Insider Stock Trading, Intellectual Property Piracy, Market Dominance, Predatory Pricing, Price Fixing, Price Gouging, Racism, Retaliation, Sexism, Sexual Harassment, Social Injustice, Unethical Practices and Unsafe Working Conditions just to name a few.
This website is a repository to disseminate and publish important information regarding any potentially illegal or unethical activities by the leadership management of the Amazon (dot com) Inc. organization and will be constantly updated as facts become known and available.
Amazon is Notorious for being involved with intolerable actions within its ranks and the company should be broken up into numerous different and smaller parts or eliminated completely due to them allowing despicable acts to occur and Amazon has been accused by several governmental agencies for deplorable activities such as Anti Competitive Business, Antitrust Concerns, Bribery, Counterfeit Products, Defective Products, Discrimination, Fake Product Reviews, Illegal Insider Stock Trading, Intellectual Property Piracy, Market Dominance, Predatory Pricing, Price Fixing, Price Gouging, Racism, Retaliation, Sexism, Sexual Harassment, Social Injustice, Unethical Practices and Unsafe Working Conditions just to name a few.
December 14, 2020
California urges court to compel Amazon to comply with coronavirus probe
(Reuters) -California Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Monday petitioned a court to compel Amazon.com Inc to comply with outstanding investigative subpoenas over the probe of the company’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
The petition, filed with the Sacramento County Superior Court, alleges that Amazon has failed to adequately comply with requests for information as part of this probe that looks into the company’s coronavirus protocols and the status of COVID-19 cases at its facilities across the state.
“Amazon has delayed responding adequately to our investigative requests long enough,” Becerra said in the petition.
The subpoenas seek specific details about the nature and extent of Amazon’s coronavirus prevention efforts, including sick leave policies, cleaning procedures, as well as data on the number of infections and deaths at its warehouses in California, the petition said.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
California urges court to compel Amazon to comply with coronavirus probe
(Reuters) -California Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Monday petitioned a court to compel Amazon.com Inc to comply with outstanding investigative subpoenas over the probe of the company’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
The petition, filed with the Sacramento County Superior Court, alleges that Amazon has failed to adequately comply with requests for information as part of this probe that looks into the company’s coronavirus protocols and the status of COVID-19 cases at its facilities across the state.
“Amazon has delayed responding adequately to our investigative requests long enough,” Becerra said in the petition.
The subpoenas seek specific details about the nature and extent of Amazon’s coronavirus prevention efforts, including sick leave policies, cleaning procedures, as well as data on the number of infections and deaths at its warehouses in California, the petition said.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
New York Attorney General Letitia James sent a letter to Amazon in April saying it was looking into whether the company violated federal employment law or broke the state's whistleblower laws when it fired a worker who organized a strike at its Staten Island facility. Jun 12, 2020
Amazon hit with E.U. antitrust charges over its use of data November 10, 2020
The e-commerce giant faces a possible fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide revenue, which could amount to billions of dollars.
LONDON — European Union regulators have filed antitrust charges against Amazon, accusing the e-commerce giant of using data to gain an unfair advantage over merchants using its platform.
The E.U.'s executive commission, the bloc's top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that the charges have been sent to the company.
The commission said it takes issue with Amazon's systematic use of non-public business data to avoid “the normal risks of competition and to leverage its dominance" for e-commerce services in France and Germany, the company's two biggest markets in the E.U.
The E.U. started looking into Amazon in 2018 and has been focusing on its dual role as a marketplace and retailer.
In addition to selling its own products, the U.S. company allows third-party retailers to sell their own goods through its site. Last year, more than half of the items sold on Amazon worldwide were from these outside merchants.
Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, the E.U. commissioner in charge of competition, said it’s not a problem that Amazon is a successful business but “our concern is very specific business conduct which appears to distort genuine competition.”
Vestager also opened a second investigation into Amazon over whether it favours its own products and those from third-party merchants that use its logistics and delivery services.
The e-commerce giant faces a possible fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide revenue, which could amount to billions of dollars.
LONDON — European Union regulators have filed antitrust charges against Amazon, accusing the e-commerce giant of using data to gain an unfair advantage over merchants using its platform.
The E.U.'s executive commission, the bloc's top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that the charges have been sent to the company.
The commission said it takes issue with Amazon's systematic use of non-public business data to avoid “the normal risks of competition and to leverage its dominance" for e-commerce services in France and Germany, the company's two biggest markets in the E.U.
The E.U. started looking into Amazon in 2018 and has been focusing on its dual role as a marketplace and retailer.
In addition to selling its own products, the U.S. company allows third-party retailers to sell their own goods through its site. Last year, more than half of the items sold on Amazon worldwide were from these outside merchants.
Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, the E.U. commissioner in charge of competition, said it’s not a problem that Amazon is a successful business but “our concern is very specific business conduct which appears to distort genuine competition.”
Vestager also opened a second investigation into Amazon over whether it favours its own products and those from third-party merchants that use its logistics and delivery services.
Notorious Markets - The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) reports on the adequacy and effectiveness of trading partners’ protection of intellectual property rights and the findings of its Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy, which highlights online and physical markets that reportedly engage in and facilitate substantial trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy.
“The Trump Administration is committed to holding intellectual property rights violators accountable and to ensuring that American innovators and creators have a full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their work,” said U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.
The United States Government has determined that Amazon, the company founded and operated by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, facilitates the criminal activity of trademark counterfeiting and piracy of products sales to billions of people around the globe for which Amazon profits enormously through these highly illegal actions.
White House trade and economic adviser Peter Navarro defended the decision to add the Amazon websites to the notorious markets list saying "This is an action clearly justified by the behavior of the worst counterfeit-enabler in the world and the Amazon brain trust would rather fight this out in the media through their swamp-creature spin doctors than clean up their marketplace in the urgent ways necessary to protect the American people from fraud and often physical harm from dangerous counterfeit products."
“The Trump Administration is committed to holding intellectual property rights violators accountable and to ensuring that American innovators and creators have a full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their work,” said U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer.
The United States Government has determined that Amazon, the company founded and operated by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, facilitates the criminal activity of trademark counterfeiting and piracy of products sales to billions of people around the globe for which Amazon profits enormously through these highly illegal actions.
White House trade and economic adviser Peter Navarro defended the decision to add the Amazon websites to the notorious markets list saying "This is an action clearly justified by the behavior of the worst counterfeit-enabler in the world and the Amazon brain trust would rather fight this out in the media through their swamp-creature spin doctors than clean up their marketplace in the urgent ways necessary to protect the American people from fraud and often physical harm from dangerous counterfeit products."
Shoppers BEWARE! This website will expose the dirty underbelly of Amazon and its leadership so the entire world will know all of the inappropriate and potential illegal and unsafe actions the company has perpetuated over the years against its employees, consumers and innocent bystanders. No one can escape the long arm of the law, not even Jeff Bezos, and you can not "mislead Congress" and get away with it forever!
Do not purchase Counterfeit or Dangerous products, especially electronic devices and toys, that have not been authenticated by a reputable US Government agency to assure the quality and provenance of every item, your lives and the lives of your children depend on it!
Do not purchase Counterfeit or Dangerous products, especially electronic devices and toys, that have not been authenticated by a reputable US Government agency to assure the quality and provenance of every item, your lives and the lives of your children depend on it!
There have been numerous reports that Amazon, the company founded by the richest man in the world Jeff Bezos, has advertised to hire individuals with spying skills that could quite possibly spy on Amazon employees and more, a disturbing fact if true, and copies of those ads are attached.
Why would the richest man in the world be so paranoid and deathly afraid of his own employees that he felt compelled to hire people to illegally spy on them?
The United States Senate is so understandably concerned that they felt the need to send Jeff Bezos a formal letter asking him if he is indeed spying on his own employees at Amazon! (letter attached)
The same U.S. Senate sent Jeff Bezos another letter demanding that AmazonBasics discontinue selling products that are fire hazards which have already severely harmed several Amazon customers. (letter attached)
U.S. Senator Brian Schatz, on behalf of himself and Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernard Sanders and Kirsten Gillibrand, sent Jeff Bezos a letter on October 15, 2020 and requesting a response to their very direct and specific 18 questions no later than November 1, 2020 stating among other things that Amazon emphatically "misled Congress" which is an extremely hazardous situation to be in to say the least. (letter attached)
Amazon is well known for selling dangerous and defective products to their customers, and when these people are harmed, denying emphatically that Amazon has no responsibility whatsoever to even pay medical bills for their customers who have been physically harmed by their defective products.
Jeff Bezos is unconcerned with the extensive damage inflicted upon the unsuspecting Amazon consumers, but instead is much more interested in increasing his monumentally vast wealth at their expense, regardless of any pain and suffering they endure caused by the defective merchandise delivered by Amazon.
The California Appeals Court ruled recently that Amazon can not escape responsibility for defective products that severely harmed Angela Bolger when a defective laptop battery exploded and burnt her causing enormous pain and suffering however Amazon refused to acknowledge that they were in fact at fault even though they were the legal seller of the hazardous laptop. Just one example of many that indicates the risk one takes when trusting Amazon to do the right thing.
In another dangerous product situation Amazon has settled a high-stakes battle over its liability for defective merchandise that left a woman blind in one eye, the company's lawyer told a federal judge.
News of the settlement was revealed in papers that were quietly filed late last week. Terms were not disclosed.
The deal brings an end to a closely watched fight over Amazon's legal responsibility for products sold through its online marketplace.
The battle dated to 2016, when Pennsylvania resident Heather Oberdorf alleged she was severely injured by a faulty product she purchased via Amazon's marketplace from the vendor The Furry Gang.
She and her husband sued Amazon in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, claiming that the company sold a product with a defective design.
Oberdorf alleged that she purchased a dog collar from Amazon's marketplace in December of 2014. Several weeks after Oberdorf began using the collar, her dog lunged while on a walk and broke the collar's ring, causing the retractable leash Oberdorf was holding to recoil. The leash hit her eyeglasses, causing them to shatter into her left eye and permanently blinding her in one eye.
The 3rd Circuit sent the case to Pennsylvania's highest court, which was slated to rule on whether Amazon would be considered a seller under Pennsylvania law.
But Amazon and Oberdorf reached a settlement before that court issued a decision.
It would appear that Amazon rushed to settle the lawsuit quickly so it could not establish a another legal precedent against their being held responsible for defective products again.
Every person who purchases anything from Amazon literally risks his or her own life because of the defective and counterfeit products that freely flow through their warehouses on any given day and there is no way to know in advance which items can cause you severe harm, Amazon does not investigate which products are harmful and apparently they don’t care enough to find out and prevent the sale since Jeff Bezos has become extremely rich through those sales.
In addition, several governments around the world are investigating Amazon such as Canada, the European Union and India for conduct detrimental to their own customers, a sad state of affairs.
Does this sound like an organization everyone should entrust their hard earned money with, NOT!
At the very least Amazon employees in the United States should form a union for their own protection before it becomes too late and then even Congress will be unable to protect them. Worst case scenario would be for all employees to all go on strike indefinitely until Amazon agrees unequivocally to allow them to join a union.
Why would the richest man in the world be so paranoid and deathly afraid of his own employees that he felt compelled to hire people to illegally spy on them?
The United States Senate is so understandably concerned that they felt the need to send Jeff Bezos a formal letter asking him if he is indeed spying on his own employees at Amazon! (letter attached)
The same U.S. Senate sent Jeff Bezos another letter demanding that AmazonBasics discontinue selling products that are fire hazards which have already severely harmed several Amazon customers. (letter attached)
U.S. Senator Brian Schatz, on behalf of himself and Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernard Sanders and Kirsten Gillibrand, sent Jeff Bezos a letter on October 15, 2020 and requesting a response to their very direct and specific 18 questions no later than November 1, 2020 stating among other things that Amazon emphatically "misled Congress" which is an extremely hazardous situation to be in to say the least. (letter attached)
Amazon is well known for selling dangerous and defective products to their customers, and when these people are harmed, denying emphatically that Amazon has no responsibility whatsoever to even pay medical bills for their customers who have been physically harmed by their defective products.
Jeff Bezos is unconcerned with the extensive damage inflicted upon the unsuspecting Amazon consumers, but instead is much more interested in increasing his monumentally vast wealth at their expense, regardless of any pain and suffering they endure caused by the defective merchandise delivered by Amazon.
The California Appeals Court ruled recently that Amazon can not escape responsibility for defective products that severely harmed Angela Bolger when a defective laptop battery exploded and burnt her causing enormous pain and suffering however Amazon refused to acknowledge that they were in fact at fault even though they were the legal seller of the hazardous laptop. Just one example of many that indicates the risk one takes when trusting Amazon to do the right thing.
In another dangerous product situation Amazon has settled a high-stakes battle over its liability for defective merchandise that left a woman blind in one eye, the company's lawyer told a federal judge.
News of the settlement was revealed in papers that were quietly filed late last week. Terms were not disclosed.
The deal brings an end to a closely watched fight over Amazon's legal responsibility for products sold through its online marketplace.
The battle dated to 2016, when Pennsylvania resident Heather Oberdorf alleged she was severely injured by a faulty product she purchased via Amazon's marketplace from the vendor The Furry Gang.
She and her husband sued Amazon in federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, claiming that the company sold a product with a defective design.
Oberdorf alleged that she purchased a dog collar from Amazon's marketplace in December of 2014. Several weeks after Oberdorf began using the collar, her dog lunged while on a walk and broke the collar's ring, causing the retractable leash Oberdorf was holding to recoil. The leash hit her eyeglasses, causing them to shatter into her left eye and permanently blinding her in one eye.
The 3rd Circuit sent the case to Pennsylvania's highest court, which was slated to rule on whether Amazon would be considered a seller under Pennsylvania law.
But Amazon and Oberdorf reached a settlement before that court issued a decision.
It would appear that Amazon rushed to settle the lawsuit quickly so it could not establish a another legal precedent against their being held responsible for defective products again.
Every person who purchases anything from Amazon literally risks his or her own life because of the defective and counterfeit products that freely flow through their warehouses on any given day and there is no way to know in advance which items can cause you severe harm, Amazon does not investigate which products are harmful and apparently they don’t care enough to find out and prevent the sale since Jeff Bezos has become extremely rich through those sales.
In addition, several governments around the world are investigating Amazon such as Canada, the European Union and India for conduct detrimental to their own customers, a sad state of affairs.
Does this sound like an organization everyone should entrust their hard earned money with, NOT!
At the very least Amazon employees in the United States should form a union for their own protection before it becomes too late and then even Congress will be unable to protect them. Worst case scenario would be for all employees to all go on strike indefinitely until Amazon agrees unequivocally to allow them to join a union.
Amazon and Jeff Bezos selling disrespectful items just to make more money, how sad.
Commercial-scale copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting cause significant financial losses for U.S. right holders and legitimate businesses, undermine critical U.S. comparative advantages in innovation and creativity to the detriment of American workers, and pose significant risks to consumer health and safety. The Notorious Markets List (NML) highlights prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets that reportedly engage in or facilitate substantial piracy or counterfeiting. A goal of the NML is to motivate appropriate action by the private sector and governments to reduce piracy and counterfeiting.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) highlights the following markets because they exemplify global counterfeiting and piracy concerns and because the scale of infringing activity in these markets can cause significant harm to U.S. intellectual property (IP) owners, consumers, legitimate online platforms, and the economy. Some of the identified markets reportedly host a combination of legitimate and unauthorized activities. Others openly or reportedly exist solely to engage in or facilitate unauthorized activity.
The NML is not an exhaustive account of all physical and online markets worldwide in which IP infringement may take place. The NML does not make findings of legal violations nor does it reflect the U.S. Government’s analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement climate in the countries connected with the listed markets. A broader analysis of IP protection and enforcement in particular countries or economies is presented in the annual Special 301 Report published at the end of April each year.
USTR developed the NML under the auspices of the annual Special 301 process and solicited comments through a Request for Public Comments published in the Federal Register (https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013). The NML is based predominantly on publicly available information. USTR has identified notorious markets in the Special 301 Report since 2006.
Since the release of the 2018 Notorious Markets List, there have been notable efforts to address widespread availability of pirated or counterfeit goods in some online and physical markets. The United States commends these efforts and encourages governments, right holders, service providers, and the owners and operators of these and other markets, including those newly identified in the 2019 NML, to engage in sustained and meaningful efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
Several studies this year addressed global trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a report on the latest trends in trade in counterfeit and pirated goods, based on data from 2016. This report found that trade in counterfeit and pirated physical goods has risen steadily in the last few years and now stands at 3.3% of global trade ($509 billion), with some industries being significantly more affected than others—22% for footwear, 15% for clothing, 13% for leather goods, and 12% for electrical equipment. The OECD report identifies corruption, poor IP enforcement, free trade zones, China’s role as a top producer of counterfeit and pirated goods, and the use of post or courier services to send small shipments as key factors behind this growth. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) investigated the “epidemic of counterfeit goods sold online” in the United States and issued a report finding that “[o]rganized criminals operating out of China are behind the vast majority of this fraud,” and that they are “supported by a large ecosystem of groups that arrange for credit card processing.” The BBB recommended that credit card payment processors increase their efforts to combat the sellers of counterfeit goods. A study by Ghostdata of counterfeit goods sold on Instagram found that the “top payment system is by far WeChat Pay,” which is owned by Chinese company Tencent.
The United States commends these efforts, appreciates studies being done in this area, and encourages its trading partners to continue their individual and cooperative efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
The Notorious Markets List identifies prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets in which pirated or counterfeit products and services reportedly are available or that facilitate substantial piracy and counterfeiting. It does not constitute a legal finding of a violation or an analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement environment in any country or economy. The NML is not an exhaustive inventory of all notorious markets around the world. Markets on the NML are drawn from the many nominations received as well as other input, such as from U.S. embassies, in order to highlight prominent examples of both online and physical markets where pirated or counterfeit goods and services reportedly are trafficked to the detriment of legitimate trade in IP-intensive goods and services.
Owners and operators of notorious markets that are willing to address piracy and counterfeiting have many options for doing so. Such owners and operators can, for example, adopt business models that rely on the licensed distribution of legitimate content and can negotiate appropriate licenses with right holders. If an otherwise legitimate business has become a platform for piracy or counterfeiting, the owner or operator can work with right holders and law enforcement officials to help discourage and curtail acts of infringement. Industry groups have developed a variety of best practices that can help combat counterfeiting and piracy. In the absence of good faith efforts, responsible government authorities should investigate reports of piracy and counterfeiting in these and similar markets and pursue appropriate action against such markets and their owners and operators. Governments should also ensure that appropriate enforcement tools are at the disposal of right holders and government authorities, which may require closing loopholes that permit operators to evade enforcement laws.
Presidential Memorandum addressing trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods. In January 2020, in response to the Presidential Memorandum, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a report on “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods.” The DHS report notes that, although e-commerce has supported the launch of thousands of legitimate businesses, e-commerce platforms, third-party marketplaces, and their supporting intermediaries have also served as powerful stimulants for the trafficking of counterfeit and pirated goods. Selling counterfeit and pirated goods through e-commerce platforms and related online third-party marketplaces can be a highly profitable venture. For counterfeiters, production costs are low, millions of potential customers are available online, transactions are convenient, and listing goods on well-known platforms provides an air of legitimacy. Moreover, when sellers of illicit goods are in another country, they are exposed to relatively little risk of criminal prosecution or civil liability under current law enforcement and regulatory practices.
USTR agrees that actions should be taken to protect American consumers and businesses against the harm and losses inflicted by counterfeiters.
In light of these concerns, USTR believes e-commerce platforms need to take additional actions to combat trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods and reduce the availability of such goods on their platforms. For example, the DHS “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods” report called for the swift adoption by e-commerce platforms that operate third-party marketplaces and other third-party intermediaries of the following ten high priority best practices:
1. Comprehensive "Terms of Service" Agreements
2. Significantly Enhanced Vetting of Third-Party Sellers
3. Limitations on High Risk Products
4. Efficient Notice and Takedown Procedures
5. Enhanced Post-Discovery Actions
6. Indemnity Requirements for Foreign Sellers
7. Clear Transactions Through Banks that Comply with U.S. Enforcement Requests
8. Pre-Sale Identification of Third-Party Sellers
9. Establish Marketplace Seller IDs
10. Clearly Identifiable Country of Origin Disclosures
Without such actions, U.S. right holders stand to be irreparably damaged by a flood of imported counterfeit and pirated goods on e-commerce platforms, regardless of where such platforms are based. Consistent with the Presidential Memorandum on Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, USTR will continue to address the issue of counterfeit and pirated goods with our trading partners and is considering seeking more information regarding e-commerce platforms, including those based in the United States, in future reviews of Notorious Markets.
AMAZON’S FOREIGN DOMAINS
Nominated as amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr, and amazon.in.
Submissions by right holders expressed concerns regarding the challenges related to combating counterfeits with respect to e-commerce platforms around the world. One submission specifically highlighted examples of the challenges right holders face with alleged high levels of counterfeit goods on the e-commerce platforms amazon.ca in Canada, amazon.de in Germany, amazon.fr in France, amazon.in in India, and amazon.co.uk in the United Kingdom. For example, right holders expressed concern that the seller information displayed by Amazon is often misleading such that it is difficult for consumers and right holders alike to determine who is selling the goods and that anyone can become a seller on Amazon with too much ease because Amazon does not sufficiently vet sellers on its platforms.
They also commented that Amazon’s counterfeit removal processes can be lengthy and burdensome, even for right holders that enroll in Amazon’s brand protection programs.
In addition, as the scale and sophistication of the counterfeiters have continued to grow and evolve over the years, these right holders indicate that Amazon should commit the resources necessary to make their brand protection programs scalable, transparent, and most importantly, effective. More specifically, they ask that Amazon take additional actions to address their concerns, including by collecting sufficient information from sellers to prevent repeat infringers from creating multiple storefronts on the platforms, making detailed information about the real seller of a product obvious to consumers and right holders, being more responsive to complaints of counterfeits by right holders, and being more proactive in preventing counterfeit goods from appearing on the platform.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
The 2019 Notorious Markets List is the result of the tenth out-of-cycle review of notorious markets, which USTR initiated on August 19, 2019, through a Federal Register Request for Public Comments. The request and responses are available at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013. USTR developed the 2019 NML in coordination with the federal agencies represented on the Special 301 Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC). Information about Special 301 and other intellectual property-related processes and issues is available at https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/intellectual-property.
To assist U.S. right holders and consumers who confront IP infringement online, the U.S. Government continues to expand the tools available on https://www.stopfakes.gov, including by providing links to infringement reporting mechanisms at a number of popular online retailers and markets. Victims and interested parties may report IP theft and import violations to U.S. law enforcement agencies through https://www.stopfakes
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) highlights the following markets because they exemplify global counterfeiting and piracy concerns and because the scale of infringing activity in these markets can cause significant harm to U.S. intellectual property (IP) owners, consumers, legitimate online platforms, and the economy. Some of the identified markets reportedly host a combination of legitimate and unauthorized activities. Others openly or reportedly exist solely to engage in or facilitate unauthorized activity.
The NML is not an exhaustive account of all physical and online markets worldwide in which IP infringement may take place. The NML does not make findings of legal violations nor does it reflect the U.S. Government’s analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement climate in the countries connected with the listed markets. A broader analysis of IP protection and enforcement in particular countries or economies is presented in the annual Special 301 Report published at the end of April each year.
USTR developed the NML under the auspices of the annual Special 301 process and solicited comments through a Request for Public Comments published in the Federal Register (https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013). The NML is based predominantly on publicly available information. USTR has identified notorious markets in the Special 301 Report since 2006.
Since the release of the 2018 Notorious Markets List, there have been notable efforts to address widespread availability of pirated or counterfeit goods in some online and physical markets. The United States commends these efforts and encourages governments, right holders, service providers, and the owners and operators of these and other markets, including those newly identified in the 2019 NML, to engage in sustained and meaningful efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
Several studies this year addressed global trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a report on the latest trends in trade in counterfeit and pirated goods, based on data from 2016. This report found that trade in counterfeit and pirated physical goods has risen steadily in the last few years and now stands at 3.3% of global trade ($509 billion), with some industries being significantly more affected than others—22% for footwear, 15% for clothing, 13% for leather goods, and 12% for electrical equipment. The OECD report identifies corruption, poor IP enforcement, free trade zones, China’s role as a top producer of counterfeit and pirated goods, and the use of post or courier services to send small shipments as key factors behind this growth. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) investigated the “epidemic of counterfeit goods sold online” in the United States and issued a report finding that “[o]rganized criminals operating out of China are behind the vast majority of this fraud,” and that they are “supported by a large ecosystem of groups that arrange for credit card processing.” The BBB recommended that credit card payment processors increase their efforts to combat the sellers of counterfeit goods. A study by Ghostdata of counterfeit goods sold on Instagram found that the “top payment system is by far WeChat Pay,” which is owned by Chinese company Tencent.
The United States commends these efforts, appreciates studies being done in this area, and encourages its trading partners to continue their individual and cooperative efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting.
The Notorious Markets List identifies prominent and illustrative examples of online and physical markets in which pirated or counterfeit products and services reportedly are available or that facilitate substantial piracy and counterfeiting. It does not constitute a legal finding of a violation or an analysis of the general IP protection and enforcement environment in any country or economy. The NML is not an exhaustive inventory of all notorious markets around the world. Markets on the NML are drawn from the many nominations received as well as other input, such as from U.S. embassies, in order to highlight prominent examples of both online and physical markets where pirated or counterfeit goods and services reportedly are trafficked to the detriment of legitimate trade in IP-intensive goods and services.
Owners and operators of notorious markets that are willing to address piracy and counterfeiting have many options for doing so. Such owners and operators can, for example, adopt business models that rely on the licensed distribution of legitimate content and can negotiate appropriate licenses with right holders. If an otherwise legitimate business has become a platform for piracy or counterfeiting, the owner or operator can work with right holders and law enforcement officials to help discourage and curtail acts of infringement. Industry groups have developed a variety of best practices that can help combat counterfeiting and piracy. In the absence of good faith efforts, responsible government authorities should investigate reports of piracy and counterfeiting in these and similar markets and pursue appropriate action against such markets and their owners and operators. Governments should also ensure that appropriate enforcement tools are at the disposal of right holders and government authorities, which may require closing loopholes that permit operators to evade enforcement laws.
Presidential Memorandum addressing trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods. In January 2020, in response to the Presidential Memorandum, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a report on “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods.” The DHS report notes that, although e-commerce has supported the launch of thousands of legitimate businesses, e-commerce platforms, third-party marketplaces, and their supporting intermediaries have also served as powerful stimulants for the trafficking of counterfeit and pirated goods. Selling counterfeit and pirated goods through e-commerce platforms and related online third-party marketplaces can be a highly profitable venture. For counterfeiters, production costs are low, millions of potential customers are available online, transactions are convenient, and listing goods on well-known platforms provides an air of legitimacy. Moreover, when sellers of illicit goods are in another country, they are exposed to relatively little risk of criminal prosecution or civil liability under current law enforcement and regulatory practices.
USTR agrees that actions should be taken to protect American consumers and businesses against the harm and losses inflicted by counterfeiters.
In light of these concerns, USTR believes e-commerce platforms need to take additional actions to combat trafficking in counterfeit and pirated goods and reduce the availability of such goods on their platforms. For example, the DHS “Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods” report called for the swift adoption by e-commerce platforms that operate third-party marketplaces and other third-party intermediaries of the following ten high priority best practices:
1. Comprehensive "Terms of Service" Agreements
2. Significantly Enhanced Vetting of Third-Party Sellers
3. Limitations on High Risk Products
4. Efficient Notice and Takedown Procedures
5. Enhanced Post-Discovery Actions
6. Indemnity Requirements for Foreign Sellers
7. Clear Transactions Through Banks that Comply with U.S. Enforcement Requests
8. Pre-Sale Identification of Third-Party Sellers
9. Establish Marketplace Seller IDs
10. Clearly Identifiable Country of Origin Disclosures
Without such actions, U.S. right holders stand to be irreparably damaged by a flood of imported counterfeit and pirated goods on e-commerce platforms, regardless of where such platforms are based. Consistent with the Presidential Memorandum on Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, USTR will continue to address the issue of counterfeit and pirated goods with our trading partners and is considering seeking more information regarding e-commerce platforms, including those based in the United States, in future reviews of Notorious Markets.
AMAZON’S FOREIGN DOMAINS
Nominated as amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, amazon.fr, and amazon.in.
Submissions by right holders expressed concerns regarding the challenges related to combating counterfeits with respect to e-commerce platforms around the world. One submission specifically highlighted examples of the challenges right holders face with alleged high levels of counterfeit goods on the e-commerce platforms amazon.ca in Canada, amazon.de in Germany, amazon.fr in France, amazon.in in India, and amazon.co.uk in the United Kingdom. For example, right holders expressed concern that the seller information displayed by Amazon is often misleading such that it is difficult for consumers and right holders alike to determine who is selling the goods and that anyone can become a seller on Amazon with too much ease because Amazon does not sufficiently vet sellers on its platforms.
They also commented that Amazon’s counterfeit removal processes can be lengthy and burdensome, even for right holders that enroll in Amazon’s brand protection programs.
In addition, as the scale and sophistication of the counterfeiters have continued to grow and evolve over the years, these right holders indicate that Amazon should commit the resources necessary to make their brand protection programs scalable, transparent, and most importantly, effective. More specifically, they ask that Amazon take additional actions to address their concerns, including by collecting sufficient information from sellers to prevent repeat infringers from creating multiple storefronts on the platforms, making detailed information about the real seller of a product obvious to consumers and right holders, being more responsive to complaints of counterfeits by right holders, and being more proactive in preventing counterfeit goods from appearing on the platform.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
The 2019 Notorious Markets List is the result of the tenth out-of-cycle review of notorious markets, which USTR initiated on August 19, 2019, through a Federal Register Request for Public Comments. The request and responses are available at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket Number USTR-2019-0013. USTR developed the 2019 NML in coordination with the federal agencies represented on the Special 301 Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC). Information about Special 301 and other intellectual property-related processes and issues is available at https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/intellectual-property.
To assist U.S. right holders and consumers who confront IP infringement online, the U.S. Government continues to expand the tools available on https://www.stopfakes.gov, including by providing links to infringement reporting mechanisms at a number of popular online retailers and markets. Victims and interested parties may report IP theft and import violations to U.S. law enforcement agencies through https://www.stopfakes
FairContractingPractices.com
Fair Contracting Practices
AmazonAntitrustLawsuit.com
Amazon Antitrust Lawsuit
AmazonStolenGoods.com
Amazon Stolen Goods
AmazonEUAntitrust.com
Amazon EU Antitrust
AmazonBribery.com
Amazon Bribery
AmazonIllegalContent.com
Amazon Illegal Content
AmazonCriminalAntitrust.com
Amazon Criminal Antitrust
AmazonCorruption.com
Amazon Corruption
AmazonFalseAdvertising.com
Amazon False Advertising
AmazonClimateJustice.com
Amazon Climate Justice
AmazonMonopolyPower.com
Amazon Monopoly Power
AmazonClimateChange.com
Amazon Climate Change
AmazonConnections.com
Amazon Connections
AmazonNotoriousMarkets.com
Amazon Notorious Markets
AmazonLaws.com
Amazon Laws
AmazonAntitrustConspiracy.com
Amazon Antitrust Conspiracy
AmazonFakeReviews.com
Amazon Fake Reviews
AmazonInsiderTrading.com
Amazon Insider Trading
AmazonMarketDominance.com
Amazon Market Dominance
AmazonSexualHarassment.com
Amazon Sexual Harassment
AmazonRetaliation.com
Amazon Retaliation
AmazonSexism.com
Amazon Sexism
AmazonSocialJustice.com
Amazon Social Justice
AmazonRacism.com
Amazon Racism
AmazonDiscrimination.com
Amazon Discrimination
AmazonRacistGraffiti.com
Amazon Racist Graffiti
AmazonUnsafeConditions.com
Amazon Unsafe Conditions
AmazonFacialRecognition.com
Amazon Facial Recognition
AmazonUnethicalPractices.com
Amazon Unethical Practices
AmazonAntiCompetitive.com
Amazon Anti Competitive
AmazonCounterfeitProducts.com
Amazon Counterfeit Products
AmazonDefectiveProducts.com
Amazon Defective Products
AmazonInvests.com
Amazon Invests
AmazonClimateFoundation.com
Amazon Climate Foundation
AmazonPledges.com
Amazon Pledges
AmazonEarthPledge.com
Amazon Earth Pledge
AmazonClimateAction.com
Amazon Climate Action
AmazonClimateFund.com
Amazon Climate Fund
AmazonEarthFund.com
Amazon Earth Fund
AmazonVentureFund.com
Amazon Venture Fund
AmazonAerospace.com
Amazon Aerospace
AmazonSpaceForce.com
Amazon Space Force
AmazonPiracy.com
Amazon Piracy
AmazonPolicies.com
Amazon Policies
AmazonPolitics.com
Amazon Politics
AmazonPredatoryPricing.com
Amazon Predatory Pricing
AmazonPrinciples.com
Amazon Principles
AmazonPriceFixing.com
Amazon Price Fixing
AmazonShareholders.com
Amazon Shareholders
AmazonTrademarks.com
Amazon Trademarks
AmazonSportsCenter.com
Amazon Sports Center
AmazonHockeyCenter.com
Amazon Hockey Center
AmazonWhistleblowers.com
Amazon Whistleblowers
BezosMonopoly.com
Bezos Monopoly
BezosPhilanthropy.com
Bezos Philanthropy
AudibleSucks.com
Audible Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonAWSSucks.com
Amazon AWS Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonCloudSucks.com
Amazon Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFreshGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Fresh Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFulfillmentSucks.com
Amazon Fulfillment Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMarketplaceSucks.com
Amazon Marketplace Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMusicSucks.com
Amazon Music Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeVideoSucks.com
Amazon Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonSellersSucks.com
Amazon Sellers Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonStudiosSucks.com
Amazon Studios Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonWebServiceSucks.com
Amazon Web Service Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
ClimatePledgeArenaSucks.com
Climate Pledge Arena Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBTVSucks.com
IMDBTV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.com
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheBlueOriginSucks.com
The Blue Origin Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheWashingtonPostSucks.com
The Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchTVSucks.com
Twitch TV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashPostSucks.com
Wash Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WonderySucks.com
Wondery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsMarketSucks.com
Whole Foods Market Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
Fair Contracting Practices
AmazonAntitrustLawsuit.com
Amazon Antitrust Lawsuit
AmazonStolenGoods.com
Amazon Stolen Goods
AmazonEUAntitrust.com
Amazon EU Antitrust
AmazonBribery.com
Amazon Bribery
AmazonIllegalContent.com
Amazon Illegal Content
AmazonCriminalAntitrust.com
Amazon Criminal Antitrust
AmazonCorruption.com
Amazon Corruption
AmazonFalseAdvertising.com
Amazon False Advertising
AmazonClimateJustice.com
Amazon Climate Justice
AmazonMonopolyPower.com
Amazon Monopoly Power
AmazonClimateChange.com
Amazon Climate Change
AmazonConnections.com
Amazon Connections
AmazonNotoriousMarkets.com
Amazon Notorious Markets
AmazonLaws.com
Amazon Laws
AmazonAntitrustConspiracy.com
Amazon Antitrust Conspiracy
AmazonFakeReviews.com
Amazon Fake Reviews
AmazonInsiderTrading.com
Amazon Insider Trading
AmazonMarketDominance.com
Amazon Market Dominance
AmazonSexualHarassment.com
Amazon Sexual Harassment
AmazonRetaliation.com
Amazon Retaliation
AmazonSexism.com
Amazon Sexism
AmazonSocialJustice.com
Amazon Social Justice
AmazonRacism.com
Amazon Racism
AmazonDiscrimination.com
Amazon Discrimination
AmazonRacistGraffiti.com
Amazon Racist Graffiti
AmazonUnsafeConditions.com
Amazon Unsafe Conditions
AmazonFacialRecognition.com
Amazon Facial Recognition
AmazonUnethicalPractices.com
Amazon Unethical Practices
AmazonAntiCompetitive.com
Amazon Anti Competitive
AmazonCounterfeitProducts.com
Amazon Counterfeit Products
AmazonDefectiveProducts.com
Amazon Defective Products
AmazonInvests.com
Amazon Invests
AmazonClimateFoundation.com
Amazon Climate Foundation
AmazonPledges.com
Amazon Pledges
AmazonEarthPledge.com
Amazon Earth Pledge
AmazonClimateAction.com
Amazon Climate Action
AmazonClimateFund.com
Amazon Climate Fund
AmazonEarthFund.com
Amazon Earth Fund
AmazonVentureFund.com
Amazon Venture Fund
AmazonAerospace.com
Amazon Aerospace
AmazonSpaceForce.com
Amazon Space Force
AmazonPiracy.com
Amazon Piracy
AmazonPolicies.com
Amazon Policies
AmazonPolitics.com
Amazon Politics
AmazonPredatoryPricing.com
Amazon Predatory Pricing
AmazonPrinciples.com
Amazon Principles
AmazonPriceFixing.com
Amazon Price Fixing
AmazonShareholders.com
Amazon Shareholders
AmazonTrademarks.com
Amazon Trademarks
AmazonSportsCenter.com
Amazon Sports Center
AmazonHockeyCenter.com
Amazon Hockey Center
AmazonWhistleblowers.com
Amazon Whistleblowers
BezosMonopoly.com
Bezos Monopoly
BezosPhilanthropy.com
Bezos Philanthropy
AudibleSucks.com
Audible Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonAWSSucks.com
Amazon AWS Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonCloudSucks.com
Amazon Cloud Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFreshGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Fresh Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonFulfillmentSucks.com
Amazon Fulfillment Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonGrocerySucks.com
Amazon Grocery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMarketplaceSucks.com
Amazon Marketplace Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonMusicSucks.com
Amazon Music Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonPrimeVideoSucks.com
Amazon Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonSellersSucks.com
Amazon Sellers Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonStudiosSucks.com
Amazon Studios Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
AmazonWebServiceSucks.com
Amazon Web Service Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
ClimatePledgeArenaSucks.com
Climate Pledge Arena Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
IMDBTVSucks.com
IMDBTV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
PrimeVideoSucks.com
Prime Video Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheBlueOriginSucks.com
The Blue Origin Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TheWashingtonPostSucks.com
The Washington Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
TwitchTVSucks.com
Twitch TV Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WashPostSucks.com
Wash Post Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WonderySucks.com
Wondery Sucks - NOT FOR SALE
WholeFoodsMarketSucks.com
Whole Foods Market Sucks - NOT FOR SALE