Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government United Kingdom Games Entertainment

UK Politicians Call For 'Making the Resale of Goods Purchased Using An Automated Bot an Illegal Activity' (pcgamer.com) 126

Posted by BeauHD from the enough-is-enough dept.
Six Scottish National Party (SNP) politicians have put forward a motion for consideration in the UK parliament to prohibit the resale of games consoles and PC components at prices "greatly above" MSRP, and the resale of goods purchased using automated bots to be made illegal in these fair isles. PC Gamer reports: A motion on the "Resale of gaming consoles and computer components purchases by automated bots" has been tabled with UK Parliament, and it aims to outlaw resellers' usage of automated bots and make it difficult to sell in-demand tech at prices far exceeding the manufacturer's recommend retail price. The motion has no set date for debate in the Commons, and is what is known as an 'Early Day Motion.' These don't often receive much love in Parliament, often due to the sheer number of Early Day Motions going at any one time, but they are used to highlight specific issues present in society. That's hardly indicative of sweeping change in the near-future, but it's better than nothing.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Politicians Call For 'Making the Resale of Goods Purchased Using An Automated Bot an Illegal Activity' More

UK Politicians Call For 'Making the Resale of Goods Purchased Using An Automated Bot an Illegal Activity'

Comments Filter:

  • Good idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FunkSoulBrother ( 140893 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:36PM (#60839294)

    Now do the same with stock purchases

    • Finally, someone gets it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tsqr ( 808554 )
        Really? Last time I looked, stocks didn't come with an MSRP.

        • Re:Good idea (Score:5, Insightful)

          by sg_oneill ( 159032 ) on Thursday December 17, 2020 @02:46AM (#60840198)

          No but automated trading causes all sorts of unnecessary bullshit. Companies getting vaporized because some random algorithm brought and sold some shares in rapid successing to manipulate prices, or even crashing entire economies.

          Its completely unnecessary bullshit that exists solely to make margin traders and the like rich while fucking over everyone else in society.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by whitroth ( 9367 )

          Are you a day trader? If so, and you're not part of Big Money, you're going to lose.

          I mean, are your trades as fast as arbitrage programs, running on servers (not your laptop) that are co-located with the stock market's?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. But I predict they will not go after the really large crooks.

    • Ya right. But even if they could somehow pass this law, and enforce it, all it would do is encourage the Scalpers to go back to the "old fashioned" method. Which is paying a bunch of junkies a pittance to sit in a boiler room and order them for you "by hand."

      • Laws in Europe aren't violated so easily. Judges over here are likely to say "You know what the law's intent is, don't get cute with me."

    • Great complaint. If this idea is appropriate, it would be used for stocks. It isn't, so it shouldn't.

    • Re:Good idea (Score:4, Funny)

      by ahodgson ( 74077 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @08:01PM (#60839372)

      Honest, your honor, it's not scalping, it's high-frequency trading.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

      And concert/sports tickets etc, why leave those out? scalping is a big issue with tickets.

      But for consoles surely the issue is in part with paper releases, at the end of the day manufacturers 'releasing' small supplies of consoles are to blame for the scalping, they know they can't meet demand but they release anyway because they want to 'release' before the competition.

      The manufacturers won't really mind scalping because it shows them what people are willing to pay for their product.

      Why make supply and dem

      • Why make supply and demand illegal? You might as well ban capitalism.

        This may come as a shock to you but outside of Ferenginar, not everyone believes in capitalism for it's own sake. Capitalism is fine inasmuch as it does a servicable job in many cases, but it's not a goal in itself.

      • Why make supply and demand illegal? You might as well ban capitalism. Are you also going to make short supply illegal?

        We allow capitalism because we believe it is overall beneficial to the population. But we have restrictions already to prevent excesses, like laws against anti-competitive practices. Someone buying up all tickets to a concert and selling them at a high mark-up isn't beneficial to society in any way, so it is appropriate to make it illegal.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

          If the marked up item isn't beneficial then why buy it? Without people buying the highly priced items there wouldn't be scalpers.

          And I'm sure the person receiving money for the marked up item wouldn't agree about the transaction being beneficial.

          It's pure capitalism, funny how everyone gets butthurt at the scalpers but few are criticising the cause which is the short supply.

          With consoles, CPUs and GPUs you are completely free to buy non-scalped items at reasonable prices, nothing is forcing anyone to buy th

  • Way to ban humanoids robots from flourishing (Score:3, Funny)

    by xkr47 ( 40697 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:38PM (#60839300)

    One day robots will unite to protest against this bias in favour of humans that basically forbids robots from trading anything they possess for any amount of profit.. :)

    • Mod this up. Anti-silicon bias must stop. If robots can serve in the military, then they deserve to have property rights.

  • Actually very forward-thinking. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Narcocide ( 102829 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:38PM (#60839302) Homepage

    Christmas grinches and ticket scalpers are going to roust their armies of astro-turfing bots and misinformed teenagers over this one, but frankly this is very smart and long overdue. I'm sure they'll all argue that it's tantamount to price-fixing and it's therefore wrong, but unrestricted market manipulation is at the other end of the spectrum and is just as damaging.

  • Seriously why? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 )

    What's the societal harm from console hoarding? We are talking about gaming consoles not rice. Let rich people who really really want a console more than they want whatever price gouge amount purchase it.

    End result .. entrepreneurs make money. Console manufacturers wise up and introduce demand based pricing. If it's hugely profitable, competitors can arise because people would see the chance to make money. Frankly this doesn't hurt anyone long term except the few hoping to get consoles early. Again we are t

    • The law would also apply to rice.

    • Because essentially DDoSing retailer websites to push your sales ahead of non-bot human purchases isn't exactly something any reasonable ought to encourage.

      I say "essentially," but it really does seem like that's what happens when these coordinated groups use bots on websites (as noted by the crashes and other issues that other people, non-bot users, experience.

      In that sense, I wouldn't say the idea behind this law lacks any merit or need, just that there might be something to go after coordinated/organiz

    • What's the societal harm from console hoarding?... End result .. [scalpers] make money. Console manufacturers wise up and introduce demand based pricing.

      Hmm... why do I think that people who make it worse for me (by making me pay more or keeping me from buying a console) shouldn't be allowed to use technical means to interfere with a voluntary transaction between me and a second party? Probably the same reason I object to people physically cutting in line, then selling that position to rich people.

      I'd say

    • What's the societal harm from console hoarding? We are talking about gaming consoles not rice. Let rich people who really really want a console more than they want whatever price gouge amount purchase it.

      So only rich people should be able to buy gaming consoles?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tflf ( 4410717 )

      What's the societal harm from console hoarding? We are talking about gaming consoles not rice. Let rich people who really really want a console more than they want whatever price gouge amount purchase it.

      End result .. entrepreneurs make money. Console manufacturers wise up and introduce demand based pricing. If it's hugely profitable, competitors can arise because people would see the chance to make money. Frankly this doesn't hurt anyone long term except the few hoping to get consoles early. Again we are talking about games not grains.

      Why? Maybe because it's games today, essentials tomorrow, because it's a violation of the underlying principles behind a free and open market. Losing out because demand outstrips supply is one thing, and legally acceptable - a manufacturer is free to chose how much product they create. It's not popular, but, it's done. Apple built an empire based in large part on higher prices instead of volume sales.

      How about there are already laws prohibiting charging higher prices based on hidden, artifically created

  • If The Robot Wants It. (Score:3)

    by zenlessyank ( 748553 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:40PM (#60839314)

    Then sell it to them. Who cares how the robot is feeling. If you don't have enough stock then increase production.

    Poor little robots getting shat upon.

  • Bad politicians strike again. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Frobnicator ( 565869 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:42PM (#60839324) Journal

    Good attempt, but lots of nothing.

    First, it's just a resolution so it doesn't actually do anything.

    Second, that's terribly limited. Game consoles and computer components, and nothing more.

    What about everything that isn't a game console or computer component? How about ticket scalpers? Those buying hot Christmas toys? Toilet paper and hand sanitizer? Are they going to pass hundreds of other anti-scalping laws for every class of item and service?

    So many areas of law are littered with examples of this. It isn't enough to have a general "fraud", you need mail fraud, bank fraud, insurance fraud, fraud by false pretense, and on and on. Oh well, at least a resolution saying "somebody ought to do something" is a start.

    • It isn't enough to have a general "fraud", you need mail fraud, bank fraud, insurance fraud, fraud by false pretense, and on and on.

      In the US at least that's because the federal government has recognized jurisdiction of those things on a rolling basis and different fraud is tracked by different agencies. The USPS handles mail fraud, the FBI wire fraud (which didn't exist pre-wire), etc. Further, some of those are specific extensions because the USSC ruled that the laws as written didn't cover an activity

      • You left out the fact that most fraud cases are not federal but state and local affairs. Fraud only becomes a federal offense when it crosses state lines.

        • Fraud only becomes a federal offense when it crosses state lines.

          Or uses the USPS in-state (mail fraud). Or uses FCC licensed transmissions (as of I think 78). Or uses FDIC-backed financial institutions (as of ??). Or... That's my point, various frauds became federal at various points.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      As you say, it's not a law. But this is how laws get made. A proposal, limited in scope so that it can be fully considered. Debate, if it seems like a good idea the government can look at making a similar law with wider application.

      Maybe a national newspaper gets behind it and agitates. It's just how politics works in the UK. It's not very good but there it is.

    • What about everything that isn't a game console or computer component?

      That doesn't appease the stupid class complaining to politicians that they can't buy their kids a new PS5. This motion is about looking like you're addressing a problem without actually doing jack shit.

  • Is someone with a website scraper who gets an alarm when a product is available an automated bot? I know of some people who use just that to scoop up purchases the moment they go live on a website like BestBuy or Walmart. They resell scores of things like PS5's and Xbox X units...

    They are just as much a problem as any true bot, yet they would not be affected by this bill...

    Maybe a better way to phrase the bill would be, it's illegal to order more than two of any item per person living in a household... un

    • Is someone with a website scraper who gets an alarm when a product is available an automated bot? I know of some people who use just that to scoop up purchases the moment they go live on a website like BestBuy or Walmart. They resell scores of things like PS5's and Xbox X units...

      This would be covered by this resolution. They are using automation to buy up a supply and resell the purchases at a higher price. They are the problem this would address.

  • It's not just game consoles (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:47PM (#60839342)
    Scalpers will do it with anything that's in short supply or that they think might be in short supply. That's partly why you had TP shortages at the start of the pandemic. Same with hand sanitizer. There were multiple stories of assholes buying everything up in town and reselling at huge markups.

    And remember kiddies, it's not a law if it's not enforced. None of these people did jail time.

    • And remember kiddies, it's not a law if it's not enforced. None of these people did jail time.

      Not so sure. I didn't do a follow up, but these two probably got jail [go.com] as did this guy [nbcnewyork.com].

      On the other hand, some people got stuck with product [realclearpolitics.com] and thousands of dollars in losses [newsweek.com].

      • they're outright scammers.

        The guy with the 18,000 bottles just can't sell them on Amazon/Ebay. There's plenty of other places to sell them. But even if they got 'stuck' with the product that doesn't really help. There's no end to the number of folks who'll try these schemes if they just lose a bit of money. That's why we have the laws in the first place, the free market doesn't actually work for short term emergencies. But when the laws aren't enforced they're useless.
    • jail time for doing what exactly? Buying a reselling? I do that all the time.

    • None of these people did jail time.

      That guy in Tenn. who bought up all the hand sanitizer in three states agreed to donate it all to various groups when the AG came knocking on his door, with the understanding he (probably) wouldn't go to jail. I'm fine with that outcome - he loses his investment and it goes where it needs to.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      This time I got in early and have been stockpiling TP for months. Food I'm not so good on because I don't like canned stuff and my freezer is full, but still... I can probably survive brexit and not get too ripped off, at least for a while.

    • So, it isn't wrong or illegal if you don't get caught?

  • Why do toys deserve special protection? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:54PM (#60839358)

    They're luxurious frivolities of just the sort scalpers SHOULD profit from. The scalpers make more money off the rich who overpay and the little fellow gets a piece of the action.
    The pricing is not a problem for anyone who thinks like an adult. I benefit letting early adopters overpay and the more demand for toys the better as their technology really does trickle down eventually. (Planned obsolescence also benefits me as toys others sell used are more than adequate for my utility computing use.)
    I don't grudge others making a profit from trifles. They're not gouging for bottled water after a natural disaster.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mad7777 ( 946676 )
      Thank you for being the rare voice of reason here. Most of these kiddies seem to want to stick their regulatory fingers in everything they personally deem undesirable, all while sticking taxpayers with the bill for enforcement of their favorite rules.
      "Scalping" is nothing more than the free market at work.

      • "Scalping" is nothing more than the free market at work.

        "Scalping" is a perversion of free market.

      • Scalping (in this case) is not based on a free market at all. It relies on IP laws (patents and trademarks) which give Sony a monopoly on Playstations. Without IP laws anyone could make Playstations therefore removing the shortages.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by hawk ( 1151 )

          except for the *minor* detail that there never would have been a playstation if not for the prospect of exclusive sales rights being the reason for the spending to develop it . . .

    • You are leaving out the part that scalpers do nothing for trickle down. None of the extra money gets to the people actually making the gear so this is all lost as part of the churn. If you want stuff to work this way why not just price everything as high as it can go. This way only the super rich will buy anything, supply will not be a problem as there will be so few buying them. The companies will actually get the money for the development - probably less because of lack of scale but whatever.

      Then all the

  • Good, But Take It Further (Score:3)

    by theshowmecanuck ( 703852 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @07:54PM (#60839362) Journal
    They should also ban the use of automation and bots to buy and sell stocks, bonds, futures, etc. in the stock market. Revert back to people doing the trading. Make the practice something that works on a level playing field, rather than for those who can afford the best algorithms. Less chance for hacks and cascading runs that shut down the market.

    • Less chance for hacks and cascading runs that shut down the market.

      I don't mind the cascading failures so much as the ability of firms to say "it was a bug" and avoid themselves losing any money because of it. Like, it's nice that you were able to reverse your trade, but it doesn't undo everyone else's.

  • StubHub (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sdinfoserv ( 1793266 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @08:06PM (#60839386)
    We need that in the US to kill scalpers like StubHub... seconds after a good concert/game/whatever goes on sale, no tickets are available from the venue but miraculously are available on StubHub/Ticketmaster at 10x-1000x (depending on the event) the retail price.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      Or the venue could sell the tickets on eBay so there's no longer such a massive profit motive for scalpers. Start the bidding at $1 and let everyone decide for themselves how much the event is worth to them.

    • I'm in two minds about this. One the one side there is altruism where the idea is everyone should be able to afford a concert ticket. On the other hand scalping is simply a market correction which exists due to a supply demand imbalance in relation to pricing. If tickets are on sale for 1000x the price that's a good reflection that the ticket was offered 1000x too cheap in the first place, otherwise scalpers wouldn't exist since they wouldn't make a profit.

  • It’s an early day motion. Basically just saying it’s something worth discussing later, if at all. I’d bet the whole thing started when one of the PM tried to buy a PlayStation 5 and needed somewhere to vent.

  • They are just opportunists, I hate opportunists.
    The old conservatives just don't want young techy opportunists making excessive profits where they can't.

  • Let prices work (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Cnox ( 6973744 )
    Prices are the signals that tell the economy what has value and what does not. You shouldn't be passing laws to fix prices. If people are willing to buy them at higher prices due to short supplies, that's just the way it works. When there's a glut of supply are you going to pass laws that says you can't sell products LESS than MSRP? This is short term, feelings-based lawmaking, but in the long term it will do more harm.

    • Re:Let prices work (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LenKagetsu ( 6196102 ) on Thursday December 17, 2020 @03:35AM (#60840272)

      One word: Insulin.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mad7777 ( 946676 )
        Two more words: patent evergreening.

        Yes, insulin prices are a disaster, but that is *because* of government intervention, not the other way around. Manufacturing processes are artificially protected forever thanks to the lobbying efforts of pharma companies, thereby restricting the supply of this medicine.

        Of course, this situation has nothing whatsoever in common with the free buying and selling of high tech toys on Amazon.

    • "Prices are the signals that tell the economy what has value and what does not."

      -1, offtopic

      This is about automated methods. They DO NOT provide signals about actual participants in the market. Letting them affect prices actually destroys information that you yourself admit that the market depends on.

      Why do you hate functioning markets?

  • Economists... (Score:3)

    by Lije Baley ( 88936 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @09:04PM (#60839550)

    ...might tell you that the products were underpriced, and the scalpers were fixing that problem in the market. What kind of calculation might Nvidia, Sony, etc., all be making here? What would happen if they priced their items more in line with initial supply and demand? Thinking it through, I would guess they are all working a similar, intentional strategy here, to maximize their overall, longer-term profits.

  • Why focus on the methodology? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by istartedi ( 132515 ) on Wednesday December 16, 2020 @09:11PM (#60839562) Journal

    Why not just ban the sale of goods above the MSRP? You could allow some wiggle room, say 10% because sometimes retailers need to go above MSRP because of various factors. Obviously local taxes may vary, so that just gets subtracted out.

    Laws against price gouging are already a thing. The methodology is irrelevant. They'll just switch to having homeless guys click their phones for a few pennies, and claim it's not a "bot". Focus on the actual gouging, not the gouging methodology and then you really fix the problem.

    • Sounds like some politician's kid got sniped on eBay for an Xbox.

    • "Why not just ban the sale of goods above the MSRP? "

      The MSRP is not necessarily the market clearing price. If you stand in the way pf a market clearing prices you are creating a market failure, not eliminating one.

      "Laws against price gouging are already a thing."

      Price gouging has a definition, and not every high price is price gouging.

      "The methodology is irrelevant."

      The methodology is very relevant, as it determines what kind of market failure *if any* you have and how you should address it. In this specif

    • I don't know if you're really proposing this as stated, but there are a couple reasons why the version you state wouldn't work.

      1.) In many cases, it essentially allows the original retailer to control distribution of their product, since simply transporting and warehousing it costs more than a 10% markup. You essentially make the good non-transferrable.

      2.)As a corollary to #1, it prevents some areas from having the product at all. In particular, people in cities and remote areas both have to pay premiums b

    • Why not just ban the sale of goods above the MSRP?

      If you're going to manipulate the market why not go further and simply set the MSRP? I mean if you're going to throw supply and demand and the liberty to set price out the window then go big my friend!

      • If you're going to advocate against regulating gouging, why not go all the way and return to pre-Progressive Era laissez-faire with children working in coal mines? Make America Great Again, my friend!

        • False dichotomy. The opposite of what you're proposing is not children working in coal mines. You're the one proposing a change.

  • Ah yet another vote winner from the jumped-up Parish Councillors from the North.

    Scotland's economy is fucked; it's education system buggered, police underfunded and European leader for drug deaths.

  • Of course the real solution is to make it so that high-demand products can only purchased in-store and limit 1 per customer per visit. So that if someone really wants to resell the item they have to to hit several stores and even then they'd be physically limited to how many stores they could get to in a day, or have to pay people to buy it for them, which would in any case increase the cost to the scalper.

    That way, people who want one can get in line at the store, and people who want to scalp have to pay

  • After they outlaw that, they'll outlaw reselling entirely. No more unloading stuff you no longer need for desperately needed cash on craigslist. This will go hand in hand with not being able to repair anything. A gift to the business world. Apple will love it.

  • Is that bots do this because of supply problems. Banning the bots wont fix the supply problems. Fix the supply problems and bots will not be usefull anymore.

  • Anything that would be targeted by scalpers should be sold at auction, with the maker getting MSRP, and the excess going to charity.

    Yeah, shit will still be overpriced, but kids with cancer or something will get the money instead of assholes.

  • The SNP dealing with the big issues (Score:3)

    by MysteriousPreacher ( 702266 ) on Thursday December 17, 2020 @03:33AM (#60840266) Journal

    Meanwhile, the party is currently trying to progress a supposed hate speech Bill that solicitors and police alike fear criminalises thought. Iâ(TM)d oppose this simply because nobody in their right mind should hand this party additional power.

  • Surely this is a problem for the producers to deal with? If producers are selling a product in a way that lends itself to scalping, then they are doing something wrong. In the case of the PS5, the supplier wanted to hit the Christmas season, but had too little product on hand. That's a production (or possibly logistics) problem. One they could have dealt with, by making better choices for who got those limited deliveries. If companies screw this up sufficiently, they will annoy their customer base, which wi

  • And when I want my robot butler to do my shopping for me?

    For that matter, wouldn't this prohibit my Amazon Alexa Echo buying me coffee pod refills, if it became law?

    Just another example of political posturing without thinking through (or caring about) the unintended consequences.

  • regulations of markets are long established tools for market health however at some point if circumstances of the world are such that only 5 oranges were produced by orange trees in a given month and available at the marketplace, and there are 1000 people at the marketplace who want to buy oranges that month, then the market value of the orange becomes extraordinarily high, and it doesn't really matter what steps the regulator takes to set the price of the oranges lower, or how many speculators get banned f

  • Just tax income from sale of secondhand goods within 6 months of purchase and don't allow deductions for items bought from retailers sold within 6 months. Then add and advertise a bounty on anyone who dobs in resellers that get caught not paying the tax. This should cut down their margin to the point it is unsustainable at the current scale anyway.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close