Amazon towers above all. The US group is by far the largest online retailer in the world. And sales continue to grow rapidly year after year. The most important vehicle is the so-called Marketplace, i.e. Amazon’s open sales platform, through which independent traders offer their goods in return for payment of a commission.
In Germany, too, the industry leader now conducts almost two-thirds of its business via the marketplace. A number of other retailers have therefore long since jumped on the so-called platform business, such as Otto and About You, Zalando and MediaMarkt or Douglas, Real and Conrad Electronic.
But no wonder: According to a recent study by the software provider Mirakl, consumer preferences are clearly shifting towards marketplaces. Six out of ten of the approximately 1,000 German consumers surveyed prefer e-commerce websites with online marketplaces, according to the study available to WELT.
Source: Infographic WORLD
According to the survey, the most important reasons are convenient shopping, low prices, a large selection of products, more advantageous delivery options and a better shopping experience. The Mirakl study shows that around half of all online purchases in Germany are made via marketplaces.
And there will soon be more. At least 95 percent of the consumers surveyed expect that they will use marketplaces in the future at least as much or even more often than before. And they want to spend more money there too.
But what the customers get in return is not always original goods. “Unfortunately, one of the acute and daily dangers for consumers is still the sale of counterfeits on the Internet, especially in times of a pandemic,” says Christian Köhler, the general manager of the brand association. And online trading platforms, but also the well-known social networks are the preferred sales channels. “Europol reports that the distribution of counterfeit or substandard goods is one of the main criminal activities during the pandemic.”
The European Union (EU) now wants to take action and make online purchases, especially via platforms and marketplaces, safer for consumers. The means to an end is the so-called Digital Service Act (DSA), the form of which the members of the European Parliament will vote on Thursday.
Source: Infographic WORLD
But there is disagreement and dispute over the successor regulation of the e-commerce directive, which dates back to 2000. For the brand industry in particular, the specifications do not go far enough in some respects. About the scope.
“Consumer protection is only effective if the urgently needed due diligence requirements in relation to illegal products, including counterfeits, apply to all online trading platforms,” says Markenverband boss Köhler, who also knows that the European Consumers’ Association BEUC is by his side.
The experts are alluding to planned special rights for small and medium-sized online trading platforms. “If counterfeit sales are only made more difficult on large platforms because they adhere to due diligence requirements, the counterfeits are sold on smaller platforms – and then pose a risk for unsuspecting consumers there.”
Source: Infographic WORLD
In addition, the Markenverband calls for the application of the so-called “Know Your Business Customer” (KYBC) principle in order to end the anonymity of providers – for all platforms without exception. “All” means not only pure online marketplaces, but also other types of platforms, including social media offerings or interaction and gaming platforms.
“The purchase of illegal products is also made possible there,” explains Köhler, referring, for example, to cosmetics that are often touted by influencers, including on Instagram. There, too, it must be clear who the offers are coming from. “Customers on online platforms must be able to rely on the identity provided by providers.
Effective buyer protection is not possible without legally secure identification of providers on platforms.” Platforms must therefore check who is offering or goods via them. Support comes from the European Brands Association (AIM). “If Europe is serious about protecting EU consumers and spouses from illegal content, KYBC regulations need to be expanded.”
Thirdly, the brand association is bothered by the planned handling of identified counterfeits. “It must be ensured that once identified and deleted counterfeits cannot be uploaded and offered again,” warns Köhler.
So far, however, this important security requirement has not received the necessary approval. “But, of course, protection against counterfeiting is only possible if a counterfeit that has been deleted is prevented from being uploaded and offered again. After all, any effort to identify counterfeits is ultimately ineffective if the platforms do not prevent criminals from repeatedly offering counterfeits,” says Köhler, who now hopes that the MEPs will still consider the new proposed amendments. “The opportunity for effective consumer protection on the Internet and a fair internal market is still there – but it must be seized.”
The fact that there are different views and camps is also due to the breadth of the topic. Because the Digital Service Act does not only affect digital trade in goods and goods. At the same time, it should also regulate liability for copyright infringements on large internet platforms such as Facebook and at the same time make the operators of all internet offers liable for all illegal uploads by their users.
Discussion forums on publisher websites, smaller video portals or game providers are also potentially affected. And that makes it so difficult to automatically delete content using filter software, as required by the brand association and license holders for digital content.
From the EU’s point of view, this would overwhelm smaller providers – the law would therefore strengthen the market power position of the large platforms. Second, the filters are not particularly accurate. However, there is a risk that legal content will also be automatically deleted. And in the case of a branded product range, this is annoying, but not tragic, but very relevant, for example, when expressing political opinions.
In any case, when it comes to goods and services, it is relatively clear whether an offer is illegal or not. At least it can be proven factually well. In the case of digital expressions of opinion, videos, texts or sounds, on the other hand, it is far from clear: where does the quote end, where does the illegal copy begin?
Does copyright apply to an official text or is it in the public domain? YouTube and Co. have long been running filter programs for copyrighted videos, for example. But they are controversial because they also recognize parodies or quotations.
Or even deliberately abused: the police in authoritarian states, for example, have recently played loud music at demonstrations. As a result, videos of the opposition recorded there can only be uploaded to Facebook or YouTube without sound – otherwise the automatic filter will kick in.
“Everything on shares” is the daily stock exchange shot from the WELT business editorial team. Every morning from 7 a.m. with the financial journalists from WELT. For stock market experts and beginners. Subscribe to the podcast at Spotify, Apple Podcast, Amazon Music and Deezer. Or directly by RSS-Feed.
.