Judge: Amazon “cannot claim shock” that bathroom spycams were used as advertised - eviltoast

After a spy camera designed to look like a towel hook was purchased on Amazon and illegally used for months to capture photos of a minor in her private bathroom, Amazon was sued.

The plaintiff—a former Brazilian foreign exchange student then living in West Virginia—argued that Amazon had inspected the camera three times and its safety team had failed to prevent allegedly severe, foreseeable harms still affecting her today.

Amazon hoped the court would dismiss the suit, arguing that the platform wasn’t responsible for the alleged criminal conduct harming the minor. But after nearly eight months deliberating, a judge recently largely denied the tech giant’s motion to dismiss.

Amazon’s biggest problem persuading the judge was seemingly the product descriptions that the platform approved. An amended complaint included a photo from Amazon’s product listing that showed bathroom towels hanging on hooks that disguised the hidden camera. Text on that product image promoted the spycams, boasting that they “won’t attract attention” because each hook appears to be “a very ordinary hook.”

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Holy shit, are you talking about this case? It’s literally in the very first line of the article. I figured that was just a given. Lol my bad for giving you any credit.

    • chitak166@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sorry, you changed your initial stance to ‘without consent.’ That’s a very important distinction to make, because having a hidden camera in your bathroom is not in itself illegal.

      Unless you can cite something otherwise.

      This is exactly why most retailers aren’t responsible for their products being used in an illegal manner.

      I suggest you re-read the beginning of this comment chain to get a better idea of what we’re talking about.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        My very first question to you:

        Before I do this. . .are you saying you think it might be legal to film someone without their consent when they are using your bathroom?

        And you are saying I now “changed your initial stance to ‘without consent.’”

        lol. Classic. How about you just admit you’re wrong?