I really don't get this at all! You object strongly to high prices because you can't get a good deal? Good deal for whom? Surely it depends on if you are a buyer or a seller. As a buyer, yes, sure, the bargains are gone and that amazing guitar you know is worth a grand that you bought for 500 isn't going to happen, but as a seller it's the total opposite. If I sold my guitar for a grand, knowing it was worth 500 that's a good deal. If music is your job or your hobby you have no right to insist anyone who makes money from it is bad, and those who just break even, or make a modest profit are wrong? USA is, I'm told, the land of the free - unless you successfully make money?
If somebody buys an item from
Tascam and IDIOTS pay double for it because they are STUPID that is not a crime. If Tascam source a product from another source, stick Tascam on it and sell it for double or more, is that bad? Trouble is, they do, and if you knew the supplier you can do the same.
I'm all for naming and shaming bad sellers, but being expensive and making profit from eBay is not even morally wrong, it's business! Selling counterfeits, selling damaged items not described properly, selling dangerous goods - these are bad, and eBay already have a system. You guys are wanting people to make less money, and not take advantage of a market who may well have a poor understanding of value. If this is the case, then I'd expect your laws to support the rights of an individual to make a profit as long as it's not illegal. If I was put on a public black list for conducting business legally, I'd be talking to a lawyer damn quickly and I'd win if I'd not broken the law. Do you have defamation laws over there? You mix one legally trading person in with one crook and you're in pretty hot water.
I like the idea of shaming crooks, I hate the criteria you are using for deciding who is one! Why not include Microsoft,
Steinberg, Apple and others, because they have products with prices far above their real value, but buying them is our choice in a free society.
"Thou shall only sell things to home recordists at their idea of a fair price" is a little communistic rather than democratic isn't it? Who sets a fair price? You want it to be the buyer, I think it's the seller. If this prices me out of a deal, that's how it is. I moan about it, but the idea of naming this person publicly is simply a joke. Your reasoning is because it artificially keeps prices high. Which is what both our governments have been doing for years with the banks.