Amazon’s argument seems to boil down to “we sell products, not ads, so the law shouldn’t apply to us.” The EC response seems to be “what you would like the law to say is not what it says.”
Regardless, the fact that Amazon doesn’t like the law means it was written to protect consumers from corporations. In the states, we’ve completely forgotten that government is supposed to do precisely that.
In the US, the Government does not represent the people, but those who buy elections. The people who buy elections have no incentive to change anything, and nothing will change in absence of a violent communist revoution
Amazon’s argument seems to boil down to “we sell products, not ads, so the law shouldn’t apply to us.” The EC response seems to be “what you would like the law to say is not what it says.”
Regardless, the fact that Amazon doesn’t like the law means it was written to protect consumers from corporations. In the states, we’ve completely forgotten that government is supposed to do precisely that.
In the US, the Government does not represent the people, but those who buy elections. The people who buy elections have no incentive to change anything, and nothing will change in absence of a violent communist revoution
Meanwhile, Amazon does sell ads. Sponsored products are advertisements.