The eBay / trademark dance evolves

Originally posted 2007-06-13 18:37:48. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Years ago eBay was a problem for trademark owners, who were very exercised about what they regarded as a casual attitude toward the sales of counterfeit merchandise on its website — which was, and is, a serious problem. Speaking to IP lawyers at a recent INTA committee meeting, I had the impression that there was genuine sense that eBay has succeeded at changing the impression that it regarded this as the markholder’s problem.

But has the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction? Ed Foster writes:

As with all of EBay’s VeRO notices, the reader was told that her only recourse if she thought the takedown was a mistake was to contact the intellectual property owner who had made the claim. So she wrote to the Nervous Tattoo “fraud” department and attempted to persuade them with the receipt, detailed pictures of the merchandise with the AAFES tags still clearly attached, and an e-mail from AAFES headquarters confirming the merchandise was authentic. But the folks at Nervous Tattoo seemed uninterested in determining whether the goods were actually counterfeit. Instead, all of her very polite queries to the Don Ed Hardy fraud staff received terse, nasty responses accusing her, AAFES, and basically anyone else selling their merchandise on EBay of being crooks.

While the reader wanted to get her auctions reinstated, her bigger concern was getting the suspension of and black marks against EBay account removed. “I have been with EBay for over eight years with thousands of all positive feedback reports — not one neutral, not one negative,” she wrote. “I have worked very hard for a long time to maintain my feedback rating. I am an honest person and I have done nothing wrong. I feel like my legs have been kicked out from underneath me.”

He reports that the user eventually found someone at the company who helped to lift the ban. It seems as if eBay has not necessarily gone too far — essentially, it still considers counterfeiting the markholder’s problem. It is sharing a little of that burden by aggressive takedowns, but leaving the markholder and the eBay seller to sort it all out.

What else can eBay do without becoming so involved in the process that it will hurt profitability or, no less important, expose it by virtue of its higher involvement to a greater likelihood of third-party liability for infringement? The answer seems obvious: Provide a bona fide contact name for the company whose goods or trademarks are at issue, and perhaps even facilitate communications between blacklisted sellers and company reps. Is that so hard? I can’t claim to know. But in light of this story, it seems like a bit of fine tuning that is worth the investment.

email

Author:Ron Coleman

I write this blog.

Subscribe

There are all kinds of social media formats to subscribe or otherwise follow the adventures of LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION®. Or see the posts-by-email option below.

7 Responses to “The eBay / trademark dance evolves”

  1. JC Seri
    June 26, 2007 at 9:08 pm #

    I, alone, report 100’s of counterfeit handbag listings to Ebay every week only to check the daily ending listings and see 90% of what I report selling out to the end. Ebay has not shown in the past 2 years hardly any inclination to protect its buyers. They cater to their precious powersellers who get away with all but murder and make their fee money, and show no remorse when buyers get taken. They allow their ‘powerstealers’ to overcharge with enormous shipping fees where for anyone else the ads get canceled. I hope the designers all get together in a court of law and sue this company for their carelessness and self rightousness. They deserve all the fines and penalties the law will allow.

  2. tsingleton
    July 6, 2007 at 2:14 pm #

    in response to JC Seri…

    I, alone, report 100’s of counterfeit handbag listings to Ebay every week only to check the daily ending listings and see 90% of what I report selling out to the end***
    Just because you,have decided it is your job to police ebay, does not mean you are 100% right, 100% of the time. It appears as if ebay finds you to be 90% wrong, 100% of the time.

    Ebay has not shown in the past 2 years hardly any inclination to protect its buyers. They cater to their precious powersellers who get away with all but murder and make their fee money, and show no remorse when buyers get taken***
    again..Just because you,have decided it is your job to police ebay, does not mean you are 100% right, 100% of the time. It appears as if ebay finds you to be 90% wrong, 100% of the time.
    The 10% of the auctions that are ended are what they can clearly see would hurt their buyers. The other 90% are all subject to a dispute being filed on the basis that the item is a fake and 100% of the time a refund is granted. That is IF the item is actually a fake.

    ***They cater to their precious powersellers who get away with all but murder and make their fee money, and show no remorse when buyers get taken. They allow their ‘powerstealers’ to overcharge with enormous shipping fees where for anyone else the ads get canceled***
    Sounds like you may have some personal issues over possibly failing at a career selling on ebay???

    ***I hope the designers all get together in a court of law and sue this company for their carelessness and self rightousness.
    I would definitly have to say that anyone who sets themself up as a perfect judge over,what is and what is not,counterfeit and then wishes things like this on the people they are judging. ALL because, their word was not taken (without question) on items they have never seen except in maybe a couple pictures. Is definitly high minded and self righteous.

    And as far as what someone else deserves…anyone who has nothing else to do in life but sit and look for someone to report, who may possibly be doing something wrong…deserves to suffer in frustration, anger and hatred. No good has come from any of your actions, the buyer has still bought their purse, the seller has still sold the purse, ebay has made their fees and all of the couterfeits have been reported, once they are received and the refund is given everytime, all without your help.
    Maybe you should find a new career, possibly in politics God knows, we can never have enough people running for office who are perfect and will commit their every waking moment to rid our society of the wrong doers. lol

  3. E Ski
    December 1, 2007 at 11:59 am #

    I just received a eBay Alert that cancelled an auction for Adobe Creative Suite 3 (mac) upgrade. This is an unopened, extra copy, I purchased a month ago from Amazon. Since they won’t take it back and I don’t need it, I listed it on eBay. Day before auction ended, I get an alert and takedown. For what? Some over-zelaous, self-righteous Nervous Tattoo copyright fiend (likely was outbid) notifies ebay that I am in VeRO (violation of a copyright). For listing a product that is Adobe’s? if this was a reseller violation, the item was never opened/unsealed (still in shrink). And Amazon has no policy that I can resell items at a loss? What if I had a letter from Adobe saying, I can do whatever I want as they own the software, I am just reselling an unused license? What the hell does this have to do with some greedy, T-shirt franchise? And how dare ebay KneeJerk the seller without due process?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® » Blog Archive » But, of course - September 10, 2007

    […] We’ve been genuinely interested in this issue for a long time — if you’re new, click here and here. […]

  2. LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® » Blog Archive » No one blinks - November 13, 2007

    […] I don’t mind saying that a Tiffany attorney asked me for a copy of the City Bar version of the report, which I had mentioned in an email discussion group, shortly before Tiffany brought suit; it may have stiffened their spine but it surely was not a “but for” cause of the decision to proceed with litigation. Tiffany and other luxury goods companies are getting killed on eBay. eBay has had forever to clean up its act on this, and while its efforts are greater than zero, they don’t come close to what they ought to be. (It certainly knows how to act as a trademark plaintiff when its own ox is being gored.) The problem for Tiffany is that American courts are simply flabby on this issue: They are easily swayed by the argument that it’s “just too hard” for eBay to “police” a million zillion auctions. But “just too hard” really means “too expensive” — but does eBay has a constitutional right to a billion dollars in profits on over $6 billion in revenues? I don’t begrudge them the money, but I do begrudge them essentially placing the obligation to police its own market on the owners of trademarks. They’re profitable too, but the law grants them the right to whatever nutty markup the public is willing to pay and to protection from counterfeits. There is no reason under that law that eBay should be allowed to profit so profoundly from creating a market in counterfeits, including a piece of the action for ever sale of a fake that takes place. Maybe Tiffany will be the one to force the issue in this country — finally. […]

  3. LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® » Blog Archive » Digital analysis of images and counterfeiting - January 24, 2008

    […] If a better mouse trap is really on the way, it will do two things: Make it harder for eBay to continue arguing that the online auctioneer itself cannot monitor sales (read “cannot cut into its profit margin”) to prevent counterfeiting, and — guess what? — reduce the volume of counterfeit sales from which it profits. […]

  4. LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® » Blog Archive » Tiffany update - August 25, 2008

    […] — which we’ve always found a bit obnoxious, considering the profit margins. As Susan points out in another recent item, back in the market […]

Leave a Reply