> Pursuing criminal charges against those who are untruthful to Congress would be a huge shift from tradition. “Almost no one is prosecuted for lying to Congress,” attorney PJ Meitl wrote in a 2006 law review article on the topic, “in fact, only six people have been convicted of perjury or related charges in relation to Congress in the last sixty years.”
Emphasis mine.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/5-people-who-lied-...
Apple, Microsoft, and Google have all copied novel technologies from their smaller business partners, effectively shutting out the creators.
Walmart and other big chains have used their sales information to know which products were worth making “house brand” copies of, then promoting those alongside the original ones.
Heck, even lying to Congress has been common and largely unpunished for years now.
American capitalism is a formidable power.
Aren't those white label products? Major manufacturers produce them, meaning they're similar in quality to regular brands, but at a lower price point. Which would mean the producer would get to target customers at two price points, which is nice.
But it doesn’t even matter what the brand is. If it looks like an equal replacement for a more expensive product, many consumers will gravitate to the cheaper option.
I don't agree at all, and your assertion contrasts with what is clearly stated in the article.
The BBC article quotes the letter signed by five members of the US House Judiciary Committee which states:
> "At best, this reporting confirms that Amazon's representatives misled the Committee. At worst, it demonstrates that they may have lied to Congress in possible violation of federal criminal law," the letter states.
BBC provides a direct quote. It was the committee members which stated that Bezos "may have lied", not BBC. It's as unambiguous as it gets.