Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Perhaps most alarming to the plaintiff, Amazon's Product :marseyoctopus2: Safety Team specifically inspected the camera :marseyjourno: to "ensure" that Amazon :marseyunibombersaint: wasn't platforming a product :marseyoctopus2: being used to “infringe privacy,” “surreptitiously record others for sexual purposes,” or “create and store child :marseyzeldalinktimechild: s*x abuse :marseyvargfinnselfdefense: material.”

bipoc you are selling :marseyburgers: a hidden :marseyhole: bathroom camera. there :marseycheerup: is no way to avoid :marseynope: any of those things

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseywoodchipper2:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Perhaps most alarming to the plaintiff, Amazon's Product Safety Team specifically inspected the camera to "ensure" that Amazon wasn't platforming a product being used to “infringe privacy,” “surreptitiously record others for sexual purposes,” or “create and store child s*x abuse material.” That review allegedly did not prevent the spy cam from being used to do just that, the lawsuit alleged,

How exactly do you "inspect" a spycam to ensure it can only be used in cases where the spying is legal?

putting consumers at risk of alleged harms suffered by the plaintiff, including "chronic tremors, insomnia, headaches, nausea, hypotension with associated blurred vision, dizziness, compulsive overeating, avoidance behavior, and paranoia."

The paranoia and maybe the avoidance (depending on what's being avoided) might be reasonable. The others make me wonder how she gets out of bed without triggering a panic attach.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

putting consumers at risk of alleged harms suffered by the plaintiff, including "chronic tremors, insomnia, headaches, nausea, hypotension with associated blurred vision, dizziness, compulsive overeating, avoidance behavior, and paranoia."

IMHO this kind of grandstanding should be unnecessary. The secret camera should be illegal on its own and there shouldn't be any need to show that the person being filmed suffered grievous bodily harm from being filmed.

It may even weaken the case if the plaintiff appears to be employing some ambulance chasing lawyer tactics to try to strengthen the case.

Not trying to strengthen the case

Trying to strengthen the payout

And to eat more cake

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseychristmasparty:

Snapshots:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.