I posted it twice, but duly noted that reaches your personal threshold for defining spam.
> The law suit is clearly about mistakes in the return process over 9 years claiming to account for 600 million dollars in returns.
Maybe you should have actually read the article first, where it quoted the total settlement topped $1bn. The proposed figures were $1.1bn using Amazon’s own estimates, whereas an objector in the case proposed closer to $1.5bn.
> Amazon does 600 billion a year in revenue. So 600 million over 9 years is a fraction of a fraction of a percent. Hope that helps.
Right. And how would their AWS, subscription, advertising, licensing, or third-party seller revenue be relevant here exactly? Why should their worldwide revenue be considered when this is a US only settlement? In fact, why would revenue be relevant at all here? Unless your point is that the figure is so insignificant for Amazon that consumer rights and stealing over $1bn from customers shouldn't be a worthwhile consideration? In which case I agree.
Hope that helps.