https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/03/us-lawmakers-seek-criminal-probe-of-amazon-for-lying-about-use-of-seller-data/ Skip to main content * Biz & IT * Tech * Science * Policy * Cars * Gaming & Culture * Store * Forums Subscribe [ ] Close Navigate * Store * Subscribe * Videos * Features * Reviews * RSS Feeds * Mobile Site * About Ars * Staff Directory * Contact Us * Advertise with Ars * Reprints Filter by topic * Biz & IT * Tech * Science * Policy * Cars * Gaming & Culture * Store * Forums Settings Front page layout Grid List Site theme Black on white White on black Sign in Comment activity Sign up or login to join the discussions! [ ] [ ] [Submit] [ ] Stay logged in | Having trouble? Sign up to comment and more Sign up Amazon Basics -- Amazon lied about using seller data, lawmakers say, urging DOJ investigation Retailer had denied using third-party seller data to develop its own products. Tim De Chant - Mar 9, 2022 5:46 pm UTC Amazon lied about using seller data, lawmakers say, urging DOJ investigation Getty Images reader comments 55 with 41 posters participating Share this story * Share on Facebook * Share on Twitter * Share on Reddit Amazon lied to Congress about its use of third-party seller data, the House Judiciary Committee said today. In a letter to the Department of Justice, the committee chairs asked prosecutors to investigate the company for criminal obstruction of Congress. "Amazon lied through a senior executive's sworn testimony that Amazon did not use any of the troves of data it had collected on its third-party sellers to compete with them," the letter says (emphasis in the original). Further Reading Amazon reportedly used merchant data, despite telling Congress it doesn't The committee said that not only was Amazon's sworn testimony knowingly false but that repeated attempts to get Amazon to correct the record or to provide evidence to substantiate its claims were either rebuffed or ignored. "Amazon has declined multiple opportunities to demonstrate with credible evidence that it made accurate and complete representations," the letter says. "Amazon's failure to correct or corroborate those representations suggests that Amazon and its executives have acted intentionally to improperly influence, obstruct, or impede the Committee's investigation and inquiries." Congress held a series of hearings as part of a 16-month antitrust investigation that scrutinized the practices of Amazon, Google parent company Alphabet, Apple, and Facebook, now known as Meta. During those hearings, lawmakers questioned Amazon executives about whether third-party seller data was used to develop private-label products or to privilege its own products in search results. Advertisement "We do not use any seller data to compete with [third parties]," Nate Sutton, associate general counsel for competition, told Congress in sworn testimony in July 2019. "We do not use any of that specific seller data in creating our own private brand products." Yet as today's letter points out, subsequent investigations by The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and The Markup revealed that not only did Amazon employees working on private-label items have access to third-party data, but they routinely used it, even discussing it openly in meetings. "Amazon employees regularly violated the policy--and senior officials knew it." Further Reading Amazon's use of marketplace data breaks competition law, EU charges After reading those reports, Congress gave Amazon a chance to correct the record or provide evidence that would corroborate the testimonies. Instead, Amazon denied that there were any problems. The company said that the reports from The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and The Markup were "inaccurate" and contained "key misunderstandings and speculation." Amazon's lawyers told lawmakers in subsequent communications that the company said that it had performed an internal investigation that didn't find any evidence of employees misusing third-party seller data. Amazon also said that the site's search engine didn't prioritize its own products. Amazon's attorneys refused to hand over documents related to the internal investigation. "Without producing any evidence to the contrary, Amazon has left standing what appear to be false and misleading statements to the Committee. It has refused to turn over business documents or communications that would either corroborate its claims or correct the record. And it appears to have done so to conceal the truth about its use of third-party sellers' data," the letter said. "As a result, we have no choice but to refer this matter to the Department of Justice to investigate whether Amazon and its executives obstructed Congress in violation of applicable federal law." reader comments 55 with 41 posters participating Share this story * Share on Facebook * Share on Twitter * Share on Reddit Tim De Chant Tim De Chant covers technology, policy, and energy at Ars. He has written for Wired, The Wire China, and NOVA Next, and he teaches science writing at MIT. De Chant received his PhD in environmental science from the UC-Berkeley. Email tim.dechant@arstechnica.com // Twitter @tdechant Advertisement You must login or create an account to comment. Channel Ars Technica - Previous story Next story - Related Stories Today on Ars * Store * Subscribe * About Us * RSS Feeds * View Mobile Site * Contact Us * Staff * Advertise with us * Reprints Newsletter Signup Join the Ars Orbital Transmission mailing list to get weekly updates delivered to your inbox. Sign me up - CNMN Collection WIRED Media Group (c) 2022 Conde Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (updated 1/1/20) and Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement (updated 1/1 /20) and Ars Technica Addendum (effective 8/21/2018). Ars may earn compensation on sales from links on this site. Read our affiliate link policy. Your California Privacy Rights | Do Not Sell My Personal Information The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Conde Nast. Ad Choices