There were too many disputed material facts on whether Amazon used the policy to coerce third-party sellers into offering their goods for lower prices than competitors in order to be given a more prominent place on the online retailer’s website, the California Superior Court, San Francisco County, said Wednesday.
Amazon didn’t definitively show it hadn’t entered into prohibited price agreements with sellers in return for making it easier for customers to find and buy their goods, ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.