论文部分内容阅读
Recently， a buyer sought to return 18 dresses to the online shop she had bought them from， saying she did not like them. However， she had already posted several photos of herself traveling， wearing those clothes.
According to e-commerce platform Taobao’s rules， buyers can return their purchases within seven days without having to give any reason as long as the merchandise is intact.
So the woman’s excuse was that she was returning the clothes， though worn， in good condition.
However， she didn’t see her action would trigger a massive negative reaction. The shop disclosed her personal information on the Internet and she received a barrage of rebukes from netizens for abusing the trust between businesses and customers.
But some people came to her support， saying that as long as the clothes were resalable， she was within her rights to return them since the shop’s own rules allowed her to do so. Since it was the shop that had made those rules， it should follow them itself.
Unacceptable behavior
Gao Yazhou （guancha.gmw.cn）： This woman insisted that she only “tried on”those clothes， invoking the condition that sold items can be returned within seven days. However， many people think that trying on clothes is different from wearing them and traveling around in them. Her behavior will definitely affect the resale of those clothes.
There seem to be two schools of thought on this. One group says to travel around in those clothes was absolutely wrong and she was taking advantage of the return-within-seven-days rule. The second group says that though trying to take advantage of a loophole in Taobao’s rules is not right， it， however， does not necessarily mean that she is wrong.
While this consumer utilized the loophole， in the final analysis， the rules are incomplete， leaving gaps that buyers can exploit. Whether the transactions are made online or at brick-and-mortar shops， the regulations must be clear and precise to ensure the legitimate rights of both sides.
While consumers’ rights should be protected， the tendency to deliberately exploit loopholes in the system at the expense of the shops is unacceptable.
Morality not the issue
Li Donglou （baijiahao.baidu.com）： While most people despise this woman’s behavior， they themselves will use this returnwithin-seven-days rule when they have grievances against their purchases.
As long as this woman returned her goods in accordance with the rules， she can do so. I don’t think she has a low moral standard just because she returned the clothes. The platform allows her to so， so why can’t she？ The shop needs to obey the rule and accept the return of the goods， instead of taking her to task over her morality. The buyer took advantage of the seven-day rule， which is common in online shopping. People also vie to grab discount coupons and exploit system loopholes to buy products at low prices. That doesn’t necessary mean their morals are bad.
In such cases， both consumers and the online shops benefit. Some e-commerce platforms even encourage consumers to take advantage of discount coupons and activities， which help to boost their traffi c.
Buyers should not be criticized just because they take advantage of e-commerce platforms to grab coupons， buy cheap products and even return products they have used. They are sometimes the element the platforms and the shops need to make online shopping lively.
As long as the woman did not violate any rules， the shop that sold her the clothes should take them back. She was kind of mean to exploit the rule but she is allowed to do by the rule.
Rules to be perfected
Yuan Shan （Chengdu Economic Daily）： Is the return-within-seven-days rule good or harmful for consumers， online shops and e-commerce platforms？ It is designed to protect all of them.
Online shopping is now a common practice. Generally speaking， consumers buy things they really need and want to do so in a safe environment where their legitimate rights are well protected. In brickand-mortar stores， shoppers can try on clothes， but online shopping will inevitably lead to the return of some goods.
The seven-day return rule was written into the Consumer Protection Law in 2014. However， some online shops have added a list of goods that can’t be returned. Also， sometimes there are disputes on how to decide whether a returned commodity is intact or not.
In 2017， the State Administration for Market Regulation detailed the products that can be returned， which means a lot of products are not covered by the seven-day rule now.
The rule is meant for two-way protection. While giving buyers the right to return purchases in a legal way， it also gives online shops clear standards to avert disputes. Standardizing the e-commerce market and making it more transparent will strengthen consumers’ confidence in online shopping and promote healthy development of e-commerce.
But there are always a small percentage of people taking advantage of the system or loopholes， like the woman who wanted to return all the 18 garments she wore during a long-distance trip. However， her behavior， though deplorable， doesn’t make her action illegal as she has not breached the seven-day rule. Online shops can take countermeasures against such immoral behavior. They can reduce or even stop selling their goods to such buyers and share the latter’s details with other online shops， which will result in her being blacklisted.
However， the shops can’t go too far. It’s doubtful if they can actually block such buyers. It can then be construed as discrimination and if the buyer takes the shop to court， it will face legal consequences.
E-commerce platforms have to follow a bottom line while doing business. Too many restrictions will discourage customers. Also， the platforms can’t modify state regulations.
So the suggestion is to change the seven-day rule. While the rule is meant to give consumers greater freedom while buying online， the vast majority of shoppers are reasonable enough not to purchase 18 clothes and then want to return all of them after wearing them and traveling in them.
There is still a gap between the ideal e-commerce environment consumers hope to see and the actual one. Some online shops sell defective or expired commodities and are reluctant to provide good after-sale service. So the seven-day rule was made by the state to create a safe online shopping environment that consumers can trust. It’s just that the loopholes need to be fi lled so that the interests of the vast majority of consumers and online shops are protected.
According to e-commerce platform Taobao’s rules， buyers can return their purchases within seven days without having to give any reason as long as the merchandise is intact.
So the woman’s excuse was that she was returning the clothes， though worn， in good condition.
However， she didn’t see her action would trigger a massive negative reaction. The shop disclosed her personal information on the Internet and she received a barrage of rebukes from netizens for abusing the trust between businesses and customers.
But some people came to her support， saying that as long as the clothes were resalable， she was within her rights to return them since the shop’s own rules allowed her to do so. Since it was the shop that had made those rules， it should follow them itself.
Unacceptable behavior
Gao Yazhou （guancha.gmw.cn）： This woman insisted that she only “tried on”those clothes， invoking the condition that sold items can be returned within seven days. However， many people think that trying on clothes is different from wearing them and traveling around in them. Her behavior will definitely affect the resale of those clothes.
There seem to be two schools of thought on this. One group says to travel around in those clothes was absolutely wrong and she was taking advantage of the return-within-seven-days rule. The second group says that though trying to take advantage of a loophole in Taobao’s rules is not right， it， however， does not necessarily mean that she is wrong.
While this consumer utilized the loophole， in the final analysis， the rules are incomplete， leaving gaps that buyers can exploit. Whether the transactions are made online or at brick-and-mortar shops， the regulations must be clear and precise to ensure the legitimate rights of both sides.
While consumers’ rights should be protected， the tendency to deliberately exploit loopholes in the system at the expense of the shops is unacceptable.
Morality not the issue
Li Donglou （baijiahao.baidu.com）： While most people despise this woman’s behavior， they themselves will use this returnwithin-seven-days rule when they have grievances against their purchases.
As long as this woman returned her goods in accordance with the rules， she can do so. I don’t think she has a low moral standard just because she returned the clothes. The platform allows her to so， so why can’t she？ The shop needs to obey the rule and accept the return of the goods， instead of taking her to task over her morality. The buyer took advantage of the seven-day rule， which is common in online shopping. People also vie to grab discount coupons and exploit system loopholes to buy products at low prices. That doesn’t necessary mean their morals are bad.
In such cases， both consumers and the online shops benefit. Some e-commerce platforms even encourage consumers to take advantage of discount coupons and activities， which help to boost their traffi c.
Buyers should not be criticized just because they take advantage of e-commerce platforms to grab coupons， buy cheap products and even return products they have used. They are sometimes the element the platforms and the shops need to make online shopping lively.
As long as the woman did not violate any rules， the shop that sold her the clothes should take them back. She was kind of mean to exploit the rule but she is allowed to do by the rule.
Rules to be perfected
Yuan Shan （Chengdu Economic Daily）： Is the return-within-seven-days rule good or harmful for consumers， online shops and e-commerce platforms？ It is designed to protect all of them.
Online shopping is now a common practice. Generally speaking， consumers buy things they really need and want to do so in a safe environment where their legitimate rights are well protected. In brickand-mortar stores， shoppers can try on clothes， but online shopping will inevitably lead to the return of some goods.
The seven-day return rule was written into the Consumer Protection Law in 2014. However， some online shops have added a list of goods that can’t be returned. Also， sometimes there are disputes on how to decide whether a returned commodity is intact or not.
In 2017， the State Administration for Market Regulation detailed the products that can be returned， which means a lot of products are not covered by the seven-day rule now.
The rule is meant for two-way protection. While giving buyers the right to return purchases in a legal way， it also gives online shops clear standards to avert disputes. Standardizing the e-commerce market and making it more transparent will strengthen consumers’ confidence in online shopping and promote healthy development of e-commerce.
But there are always a small percentage of people taking advantage of the system or loopholes， like the woman who wanted to return all the 18 garments she wore during a long-distance trip. However， her behavior， though deplorable， doesn’t make her action illegal as she has not breached the seven-day rule. Online shops can take countermeasures against such immoral behavior. They can reduce or even stop selling their goods to such buyers and share the latter’s details with other online shops， which will result in her being blacklisted.
However， the shops can’t go too far. It’s doubtful if they can actually block such buyers. It can then be construed as discrimination and if the buyer takes the shop to court， it will face legal consequences.
E-commerce platforms have to follow a bottom line while doing business. Too many restrictions will discourage customers. Also， the platforms can’t modify state regulations.
So the suggestion is to change the seven-day rule. While the rule is meant to give consumers greater freedom while buying online， the vast majority of shoppers are reasonable enough not to purchase 18 clothes and then want to return all of them after wearing them and traveling in them.
There is still a gap between the ideal e-commerce environment consumers hope to see and the actual one. Some online shops sell defective or expired commodities and are reluctant to provide good after-sale service. So the seven-day rule was made by the state to create a safe online shopping environment that consumers can trust. It’s just that the loopholes need to be fi lled so that the interests of the vast majority of consumers and online shops are protected.