You are at: Home » News » Amazon Further Denies PayBase / GAW Miners Involvement

Amazon Further Denies PayBase / GAW Miners Involvement

A few short weeks ago, Coin Fire spoke to officials at Amazon and other retailers about the implementation of PayCoin as a shopping option. We established with the retailers that none of them had any plans to integrate the cryptocurrency directly despite the repeated claims of Josh Garza and users on the HashTalk forums.

Late last night after a series of delays and technical issues, the Paybase website–a product of Garza and GAW Miners–launched to much fanfare with Josh Garza making bold claims to CryptoCoinsNews once again about implementation of Amazon and Paycoin:

Tonight you will see the first merchant integration with Amazon search and shopping within PayBase. You will be able to purchase directly from within the platform. This feature is the first of its kind.

Mr. Garza also repeatedly stated on the Hashtalk forums that they were working with the Amazon API to carry out the purchasing feature. While this is not a direct integration with the merchants as originally claimed, it does shed some light on the issue and prompted Coin Fire to speak with Amazon spokespeople further about Paybase, Paycoin, and GAW Miners.

An Amazon spokesperson once again denied any involvement with Paycoin, Paybase, GAW Miners, or Josh Garza telling the Coin Fire team,

Per our earlier statement Amazon continues to standby our first assertion that we are in no way connected, partnered, or associated with Josh Garza, GAW Miners, Genius at Work, Paycoin, Paybase or any company connected with this operation.

Amazon does run an Amazon Associates program that allows associate members to earn commissions on sales generated via our API and developer tools.

We will work aggressively to disable API calls from those attempting to avoid our account systems, those fulfilling orders that appear to come from Amazon, or those violating the Amazon Associates Program Operating Agreement.

After speaking extensively with Amazon and showing them various URLs of promises made by Garza and company, they went into further details on the exact sections of the agreement that they believed from a first glance were being violated:

  • […] will not intercept, record, redirect, read, interpret, or fill in the contents of any electronic form or other material submitted to us by any person or entity.
  • […] will not request, collect, obtain, store, cache, or otherwise use any account information used by our customers in connection with any Amazon Site […]
  • […] will not modify, redirect, suppress, or substitute the operation of any button, link, or other feature of the Amazon Site.
  • […] will not make any orders or engage in other transactions of any kind on the Amazon Site on behalf of any other person or entity, or authorize, assist, or encourage any other person or entity to do so.
  • […] will not take any action that could reasonably cause any customer confusion as to our relationship with you, or as to the site on which any functions or transactions (e.g., search, browse, or order) are occurring.

The Amazon spokespeople further elaborated,

Any piece of software, extension or other system which implies a partnership or intercepts customers or customer information is in direct violation of our terms and Amazon will act accordingly.

It further appears that Amazon is once again distancing itself of any relationship with Paycoin.

Coin Fire has reached out to other merchants listed on the PayBase website and will bring further details regarding statements from other merchants we have obtained in the near future.

Free Bitcoin Crash Course

Learn everything you need to know about Bitcoin in just 7 days. Daily videos sent straight to your inbox.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
We hate spam as much as you do. You can unsubscribe with one click.
We hate spam as much as you do. You can unsubscribe with one click.

69 comments on “Amazon Further Denies PayBase / GAW Miners Involvement”

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

  1. First of all, this amazon spokesperson is who? What is his/her name?
    Do you have any screenshot? Any citation?

    Fake journalism? FRAUD news site?
    Sorry but no thank you!

  2. Canadian Devil

    Where in the spource code are the private keys? With the private keys, anyone can access these accounts and take all the coins. Nice story. Can you read/write C++ code?

  3. Canadian Devil

    You are correct that Paycoin is a folk of Peercoin but isn’t simple.

    GAW did implement Prime and Orion controlers in Paycoin. This is the source code:

    if (primeNodeRate == 0)
    nRewardCoinYear = 5 * CENT;
    else if (primeNodeRate == 10)
    nRewardCoinYear = 10 * CENT;
    else if (primeNodeRate == 20)
    nRewardCoinYear = 20 * CENT;
    else if (primeNodeRate == 100)
    nRewardCoinYear = 100 * CENT;
    else if (primeNodeRate == 350)
    nRewardCoinYear = 350 * CENT;

    You can clearly see that prime controllers stake at a higher rate!

    There have been many fabrications regarding GAW. Please provide proof and knowledge about the subject before making these accusations.

  4. Canadian Devil

    They did not rip off Peercoin. Their use of Peercoin code abides by it;s MIT license. All credit Bitcoin and Peercoin for their contribution. Look at the top of the source code files on github:

    // Copyright (c) 2009-2010 Satoshi Nakamoto
    // Copyright (c) 2009-2012 The Bitcoin developers
    // Copyright (c) 2011-2015 The Peercoin developers
    // Copyright (c) 2014-2015 The Paycoin developers
    // Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying
    // file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.

  5. Canadian Devil

    Okay, I see public keys in the source code. They did this to implement their prime controller. Read their white papers to understand why they did this. The blockchain is great for value/pair transaction storage. This is not the best way to implement their higher stake model but it works. Securely storing meta-data in a blockchain is not easy but is possible so the cost of development is significantly higher than their hardcoded approach.

Scroll to Top