Consumers who buy Moutai online encounter fakes, and the e-commerce platform refuses to compensate 10 times, causing controversy
Loading...
With the increasing prosperity of e-commerce, online shopping has become an indispensable part of people's daily lives. However, just recently, an incident involving the sale of counterfeit goods on an e-commerce platform has attracted widespread attention. Mr. Jiang, a consumer, bought 7 bottles of Zodiac Moutai on the "Ali Auction" channel of Taobao, a well-known e-commerce platform, with a total price of more than 20,000 yuan. Mr. Jiang thought that he could enjoy the convenience of shopping with peace of mind, but he did not expect that he would accidentally step into the trap of fakes.
The Moutai liquor purchased by Mr. Jiang is prominently marked on the product page with the words "Identification by authoritative inspection institutions, first inspection before delivery, and authenticity guarantee". Such a commitment undoubtedly gave Mr. Jiang some confidence and made him look forward to the wine that was about to arrive. However, when Mr. Jiang received the goods, his friends found out that there was a clear difference between the code on the bottle cap and the original product.
In order to uncover the truth, Mr. Jiang decisively sent 4 bottles of wine for inspection. The results were shocking, and 2 of them were fakes. Faced with such an outcome, Mr. Jiang was angry and disappointed. He immediately challenged the merchant, asked for a return and a claim. However, the response of the merchants was shocking. Instead of providing a clear response to the problem of fakes, they came up with a seemingly compromising but vague solution: one bottle agreed to a refund, while the other offered triple compensation.
Mr. Jiang was angry and helpless at the merchant's way of dealing with it. He believes that this is a disguised admission of counterfeit sales by the merchant. So, he decided to complain to Taobao officials and ask for 10 times the compensation. However, to his surprise, Taobao officials rejected his request for compensation. This decision immediately aroused widespread attention and heated discussions from all walks of life.
As for Taobao's official refusal to compensate, some analysts believe that this may be due to the fact that the goods purchased by Mr. Jiang were carried out through the "Ali Auction" platform, rather than being sold directly by Taobao merchants. As a result, Taobao may consider its liability in the transaction to be limited. However, such an explanation seems unconvincing. As a well-known e-commerce platform in China, Taobao has always been committed to protecting the rights and interests of consumers. Today, when consumers encounter counterfeit goods on their platforms, Taobao shirks responsibility for various reasons, which undoubtedly raises questions about its philosophy of honest management.
Although Mr. Jiang's plight is sympathetic, his rights protection actions have attracted the attention and support of all sectors of society. Many consumers said that Mr. Jiang's experience reminded everyone to be vigilant when shopping, and hoped that e-commerce platforms could strengthen the supervision of merchants to eliminate the emergence of counterfeit and shoddy goods at the source.