Connect with us

Published

on

A prominent Amazon consultant has avoided jail time for his involvement in an elaborate scheme to bribe company employees to give his clients an upper hand on the e-retailer’s sprawling online marketplace.

Ephraim “Ed” Rosenberg in March plead guilty to a criminal charge, stemming from a Sept. 2020 indictment that charged six people with conspiring to pay Amazon employees bribes in exchange for confidential information that would benefit third-party merchants selling goods on the company’s marketplace.

Rosenberg was sentenced Friday in a federal court to two years of probation, and 12 months of house arrest. He was also ordered to pay a $100,000 fine.

Rosenberg, 48, is a well-known figure in the world of Amazon third-party sellers. He runs a consultancy business that advises entrepreneurs on how to sell products on the online marketplace, and navigate unforeseen issues with their accounts. Rosenberg’s Facebook group for sellers, ASGTG, has over 70,000 members, and he hosts a popular conference for sellers each year in his hometown of Brooklyn.

The case provides an unfiltered glimpse into the cottage industry of consultants and brokers that has flourished alongside the growth of Amazon’s third-party marketplace. Since its launch in 2000, the marketplace has become a lucrative and competitive platform for millions of sellers to market their wares. From May 2019 to May 2020, U.S. small and medium businesses selling on the marketplace had an average of over $160,000 in sales, according to a report issued by Amazon.

While the marketplace has helped Amazon haul in tens of billions of dollars in sales, it’s also become a notorious host to counterfeitunsafe and expired goods. Behind the scenes, scammers have for years resorted to illicit tactics to squash competitors, artificially boost their listings or bypass Amazon’s marketplace rules.

The case isn’t the first time Amazon has dealt with issues of company employees leaking confidential information or manipulating the site in exchange for payments. In 2018, the company investigated claims that employees, primarily based in China, who received payments worth $80 to more than $2,000, in exchange for access to internal data, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Amazon has said it invests hundreds of millions of dollars per year to ensure products are safe and compliant. The provision of internal data to sellers by employees violates Amazon’s seller policies and code of conduct.

Rosenberg’s punishment is far less severe than what other defendants have faced. A former Amazon employee was sentenced last year to 10 months in prison, while a consultant who also sold products on Amazon is serving 20 months in prison.

Prosecutors recommended a lesser sentence for Rosenberg because there was no evidence he initiated attacks on competitors’ product listings like some of his conspirators, who allegedly lodged false complaints to Amazon, and bought fake negative reviews for rivals’ products. Other defendants also pleaded guilty to tax evasion charges in addition to the bribery scheme.

Between July 2017 and Sept. 2020, Rosenberg paid bribes directly and indirectly to Amazon employees in order to steal confidential data, as well as gain access to internal systems. In one case, Rosenberg made 33 different PayPal payments worth $18,650 to an Amazon employee in Seattle in exchange for confidential information about third-party seller accounts.

Most of his payments were for account “annotations,” or an internal Amazon employee log of infractions on a sellers’ account, which Rosenberg and another defendant, Joe Nilsen, covertly referred to as “fruit” in email correspondence.

“Sellers who had been suspended from selling on Amazon could use this internal information to see exactly what Amazon had figured out about the sellers’ infractions and to tailor their appeals for reinstatement accordingly,” prosecutors alleged.

Nilsen bragged to Rosenberg over email about the services he had gained access to by bribing employees.

“I am not trying to make it seem like we have all the abilities in the world, but even though it took some time and some face to face meetings, we obtained abilities that still blow my mind,” Nilsen wrote in a Jan. 2018 email to Rosenberg, referring to his internal contacts as “high up ‘flick the switch’ type guys.”

“I don’t want to have a little menu floating around but if you are in need of anything, just run it by me and I will let you know,” Nilsen continued.

Previously unsealed court documents said Rosenberg allegedly sent a “veiled threat” to an Amazon employee at the company’s Seattle headquarters as part of the bribery scheme, Bloomberg reported. The documents also detailed the defendants’ elaborate efforts to dodge detection by authorities, including allegedly stuffing a llama-shaped ottoman with cash believed to be bribes, according to Bloomberg.

Rosenberg’s guilty plea in March marked a reversal of his position on the case. He repeatedly denied prosecutors’ allegations and claimed in LinkedIn messages to CNBC he was being framed, as well as in posts on Reddit forums and Facebook groups. He later admitted he made false statements about the case and admitted to bribing Amazon employees in a public apology posted online.

An attorney for Rosenberg, Jacob Laufer, wrote in a sentencing memo that while Rosenberg’s conduct was illegal, it was a symptom of a marketplace ruthlessly governed by Amazon wherein merchants could be arbitrarily booted off the marketplace at any time, and struggling to get their businesses reinstated, turned to illicit tactics.

“Given that these sellers were in the dark about their alleged wrongdoing, how to correct the problem, and when Amazon might recognize its error, sellers were frequently desperate and sometimes would resort to illegal means to obtain the information necessary to accomplish the goal of saving their businesses,” according to the memo. “The ‘information necessary’ was the annotations.”

Continue Reading

Technology

Week in review: The Nasdaq’s worst week since April, three trades, and earnings

Published

on

By

Week in review: The Nasdaq's worst week since April, three trades, and earnings

Continue Reading

Technology

Too early to bet against AI trade, State Street suggests 

Published

on

By

Too early to bet against AI trade, State Street suggests 

Momentum and private assets: The trends driving ETFs to record inflows

State Street is reiterating its bullish stance on the artificial intelligence trade despite the Nasdaq’s worst week since April.

Chief Business Officer Anna Paglia said momentum stocks still have legs because investors are reluctant to step away from the growth story that’s driven gains all year.

“How would you not want to participate in the growth of AI technology? Everybody has been waiting for the cycle to change from growth to value. I don’t think it’s happening just yet because of the momentum,” Paglia told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” earlier this week. “I don’t think the rebalancing trade is going to happen until we see a signal from the market indicating a slowdown in these big trends.”

Paglia, who has spent 25 years in the exchange-traded funds industry, sees a higher likelihood that the space will cool off early next year.

“There will be much more focus about the diversification,” she said.

Her firm manages several ETFs with exposure to the technology sector, including the SPDR NYSE Technology ETF, which has gained 38% so far this year as of Friday’s close.

The fund, however, pulled back more than 4% over the past week as investors took profits in AI-linked names. The fund’s second top holding as of Friday’s close is Palantir Technologies, according to State Street’s website. Its stock tumbled more than 11% this week after the company’s earnings report on Monday.

Despite the decline, Paglia reaffirmed her bullish tech view in a statement to CNBC later in the week.

Meanwhile, Todd Rosenbluth suggests a rotation is already starting to grip the market. He points to a renewed appetite for health-care stocks.

“The Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund… which has been out of favor for much of the year, started a return to favor in October,” the firm’s head of research said in the same interview. “Health care tends to be a more defensive sector, so we’re watching to see if people continue to gravitate towards that as a way of diversifying away from some of those sectors like technology.”

The Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund, which has been underperforming technology sector this year, is up 5% since Oct. 1. It was also the second-best performing S&P 500 group this week.

Disclaimer

Continue Reading

Technology

People with ADHD, autism, dyslexia say AI agents are helping them succeed at work

Published

on

By

People with ADHD, autism, dyslexia say AI agents are helping them succeed at work

Neurodiverse professionals may see unique benefits from artificial intelligence tools and agents, research suggests. With AI agent creation booming in 2025, people with conditions like ADHD, autism, dyslexia and more report a more level playing field in the workplace thanks to generative AI.

A recent study from the UK’s Department for Business and Trade found that neurodiverse workers were 25% more satisfied with AI assistants and were more likely to recommend the tool than neurotypical respondents.

“Standing up and walking around during a meeting means that I’m not taking notes, but now AI can come in and synthesize the entire meeting into a transcript and pick out the top-level themes,” said Tara DeZao, senior director of product marketing at enterprise low-code platform provider Pega. DeZao, who was diagnosed with ADHD as an adult, has combination-type ADHD, which includes both inattentive symptoms (time management and executive function issues) and hyperactive symptoms (increased movement).

“I’ve white-knuckled my way through the business world,” DeZao said. “But these tools help so much.”

AI tools in the workplace run the gamut and can have hyper-specific use cases, but solutions like note takers, schedule assistants and in-house communication support are common. Generative AI happens to be particularly adept at skills like communication, time management and executive functioning, creating a built-in benefit for neurodiverse workers who’ve previously had to find ways to fit in among a work culture not built with them in mind.

Because of the skills that neurodiverse individuals can bring to the workplace — hyperfocus, creativity, empathy and niche expertise, just to name a few — some research suggests that organizations prioritizing inclusivity in this space generate nearly one-fifth higher revenue.

AI ethics and neurodiverse workers

“Investing in ethical guardrails, like those that protect and aid neurodivergent workers, is not just the right thing to do,” said Kristi Boyd, an AI specialist with the SAS data ethics practice. “It’s a smart way to make good on your organization’s AI investments.”

Boyd referred to an SAS study which found that companies investing the most in AI governance and guardrails were 1.6 times more likely to see at least double ROI on their AI investments. But Boyd highlighted three risks that companies should be aware of when implementing AI tools with neurodiverse and other individuals in mind: competing needs, unconscious bias and inappropriate disclosure.

“Different neurodiverse conditions may have conflicting needs,” Boyd said. For example, while people with dyslexia may benefit from document readers, people with bipolar disorder or other mental health neurodivergences may benefit from AI-supported scheduling to make the most of productive periods. “By acknowledging these tensions upfront, organizations can create layered accommodations or offer choice-based frameworks that balance competing needs while promoting equity and inclusion,” she explained.

Regarding AI’s unconscious biases, algorithms can (and have been) unintentionally taught to associate neurodivergence with danger, disease or negativity, as outlined in Duke University research. And even today, neurodiversity can still be met with workplace discrimination, making it important for companies to provide safe ways to use these tools without having to unwillingly publicize any individual worker diagnosis.

‘Like somebody turned on the light’

As businesses take accountability for the impact of AI tools in the workplace, Boyd says it’s important to remember to include diverse voices at all stages, implement regular audits and establish safe ways for employees to anonymously report issues.

The work to make AI deployment more equitable, including for neurodivergent people, is just getting started. The nonprofit Humane Intelligence, which focuses on deploying AI for social good, released in early October its Bias Bounty Challenge, where participants can identify biases with the goal of building “more inclusive communication platforms — especially for users with cognitive differences, sensory sensitivities or alternative communication styles.”

For example, emotion AI (when AI identifies human emotions) can help people with difficulty identifying emotions make sense of their meeting partners on video conferencing platforms like Zoom. Still, this technology requires careful attention to bias by ensuring AI agents recognize diverse communication patterns fairly and accurately, rather than embedding harmful assumptions.

DeZao said her ADHD diagnosis felt like “somebody turned on the light in a very, very dark room.”

“One of the most difficult pieces of our hyper-connected, fast world is that we’re all expected to multitask. With my form of ADHD, it’s almost impossible to multitask,” she said.

DeZao says one of AI’s most helpful features is its ability to receive instructions and do its work while the human employee can remain focused on the task at hand. “If I’m working on something and then a new request comes in over Slack or Teams, it just completely knocks me off my thought process,” she said. “Being able to take that request and then outsource it real quick and have it worked on while I continue to work [on my original task] has been a godsend.”

Continue Reading

Trending