Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

eBay Beats Tiffany In Net Trademark Case

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the it's-your-darn-brand dept.

The Almighty Buck 61

sm62704 notes a Reuters story reporting that eBay has beat Tiffany in court in a "knockout" decision. If this had gone the other way, not only would eBay be in trouble (especially after the loss of a similar case in France), but so would Net commerce as a whole. Tiffany seems certain to appeal. "All of Tiffany's trademark infringement claims against eBay were rejected — a knockout blow to the four-year-old lawsuit that had been closely watched by Internet companies as well as luxury goods makers seeking to stop the sale of counterfeit products online. Tiffany & Co. had alleged that eBay turned a blind eye to the sale of fake Tiffany silver jewelry on its site. EBay had countered that it was not in a position to determine which goods were knock-offs... and had said the jeweler did not adequately participate in eBay's programs that help brand owners prevent fraud. The judge... said he was 'not unsympathetic' to Tiffany and others who have invested in building their brands only to see them exploited on the Web. But he said the law was clearly on eBay's side."

cancel ×

61 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Regular auction stats anyone? (5, Interesting)

peektwice (726616) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189073)

Does anyone know if Tiffany and Co. has sued any "brick and mortar" auction houses for this same type of thing? I suspect that there are any number of antique shops that routinely, perhaps unwittingly, sell fake Tiffany pieces.

Re:Regular auction stats anyone? (4, Informative)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189129)

any number of antique shops that routinely, perhaps unwittingly, sell fake Tiffany pieces

"Routinely" and "unwittingly" can be very different things. People in the antique business usually know when they're holding an actual piece of Tiffany silver work in their hands. And if a professional in that line of work can't tell the difference, then they've got pretty good cover if the real Tiffany comes knocking. But that's not what this is about - this would be more about someone setting up shop as a Tiffany dealer, as many busy sellers on eBay have essentially - and fraudulantly - done. It's not the occasional auction where someone is unloading grandma's old stuff and thinks they've got a Tiffany piece. It's the people who set up eBay stores and carry the whole product line, including obvious knock-offs of current-issue Tiffany products. Whole different thing.

So are they going after street vendors? (4, Insightful)

stomv (80392) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189273)

There are brick and mortar equivalents to your eBay Tiffany vendor -- everything from tables in Chinatown to flea markets.

Does Tiffany's actively go after the flea market owners/managers who happen to have a vendor renting a flea market stand and selling fugazi jewelry?

Re:So are they going after street vendors? (2, Funny)

UnixUnix (1149659) | more than 6 years ago | (#24192655)

There is also something called "Hong Kong". :)

Physical Inspection of Goods (2, Insightful)

sjbe (173966) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189341)

People in the antique business usually know when they're holding an actual piece of Tiffany silver work in their hands.

That's the big difference right there. EBay never holds the item so there really is no way they can reasonably tell if an item is a fake. The only real way is to actually inspect the item AND have a paper trail to help authenticate its origin. That's what they do in the art world for valuable paintings. EBay is looking for plausible deniability when they know damn good and well they aren't doing the one thing that actually can ensure authenticity reliably.

Re:Physical Inspection of Goods (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#24191365)

Considering their pricing scheme, I always thought it a bit shady that eBay doesn't hold the items. I mean.. Christies takes possession of the items, and their "warehouse" space is in the most expensive parts of several dozen cities.

Re:Regular auction stats anyone? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24189673)

Sounds like this would be a good place for Tiffany's to create a "Certified Seller" program.

Ebay can then add a nice little "Tiff/Co Certified Seller" graphic to the seller's name. (for a nominal fee of course)

I'm sure they must have something like this already for their brick&mortar stores/distributors.

Joe Sixpack can still sell one or two Tiff pieces, but if someone carries the "whole product line" but doesn't have the sticker, Tiff/co will know something's up.

Re:Regular auction stats anyone? (1)

raynet (51803) | more than 6 years ago | (#24199115)

They just cannot enforce all sellers to be certified on ebay and some customers (many?) wont really care if goods are really Tiffany's as long as they are cheap and have the logo.

Re:Regular auction stats anyone? (2, Insightful)

MagdJTK (1275470) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190551)

While you may have a point, does it matter? That's like not prosecuting a murderer because you reckon there are probably other murderers who haven't been prosecuted.

Long live Napster (0, Offtopic)

magictongue (603212) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189119)

Wow, with this ruling we can setup the original Napster again.

eBay beats Tiffany? (5, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189125)

Oh just leave the gal alone. So she made some stupid pop hits in the 80s and then tried to revive her career by posing for Playboy [outtahear.com] . That's still no reason for eBay's attack.

Re:eBay beats Tiffany? (2, Informative)

SomeJoel (1061138) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189443)

And it's particularly ironic since her biggest hit, "I think we're alone now" was a cheap knockoff of the original by Tommy James & the Shondells.

Cover songs (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190483)

And it's particularly ironic since her biggest hit, "I think we're alone now" was a cheap knockoff of the original by Tommy James & the Shondells.

Cheap knockoffs of copyrighted songs are allowed, nay, encouraged by the statutory license for cover versions in the United States and several other countries. Trademarks, on the other hand, don't have anything analogous that I can think of.

Re:eBay beats Tiffany? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24192823)

Leave Tiffany alone :'(

Re:eBay beats Tiffany? (2, Funny)

srussia (884021) | more than 6 years ago | (#24193355)

Oh just leave the gal alone. So she made some stupid pop hits in the 80s and then tried to revive her career by posing for Playboy [outtahear.com] .

Comment works for Debbie Gibson too. Just fix the link!

Re:eBay beats Tiffany? (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#24194933)

This is a bit offtopic (except as it pertains to the parent comment) so I'm downmodding myself by checking the NKB box, but things are really weird for me. I have the same name a comedian who's been on Comedy Central and who is at least as famous as Debbie Gibson. I worked with Debbie Gibson a couple of years ago - but not the singer Debbie Gibson; this woman is quite a bit older than the singer. I know Robert Blake, but the Robert Blake I know lost his leg in a motorcycle accident and never killed anybody.

Does anybody else know non-celebrities with celebrity names? I know I'm weird but I'm not sure how weird.

Re:eBay beats Tiffany? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24195523)

I think we're alone, now...

Sweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24189139)

I have a fake Exlax watch I want to sell! I could get thousands of dollars for it! It such a good fake, you'd never know it wasn't a real Exlax!

Re:Sweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24190687)

I have a fake Exlax watch I want to sell! I could get thousands of dollars for it! It such a good fake, you'd never know it wasn't a real Exlax!

What is ex-lax? [youtube.com]

The court's 66-page decision (5, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189193)

If you'd like to read the actual decision [beckermanlegal.com] . (PDF)

Thanks! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24189893)

We usually get so much inaccurate legal speculation, that it's a good thing to have original sources like that to link to.

To that I'd like to add that there is a type of fair use specific to trademarks and relevant to this case--nominative fair use [publaw.com] . I mentioned that in my submission, but I guess this guy beat me to submitting it.

I'm mentioning it because, otherwise, we'll probably have someone trying to apply the four factor test from copyright law to trademarks once the issue comes up... :-)

- I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property [eff.org]

Re:Thanks! (5, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190123)

My pleasure. That's why I did it. I can't for the life of me understand why the major media, when they cover a litigation news story, never give you the actual document to read. In these days of electronic filing of almost all federal court papers it is inexcusable.

Re:Thanks! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24191211)

> I can't for the life of me understand why the major media, when they cover a litigation news story, never give you the actual document to read. In these days of electronic filing of almost all federal court papers it is inexcusable.

Most likely because they don't understand it and they don't expect anyone else to. Yet what they fail to realize is that people come to understand things only when they keep *trying* to understand those things they do not. That's why I try to dig up a few 'educational' links whenever I submit, even if it's just a quick nod to Wikipedia (and always an old version, lest the Wikipedia editors get upset with me).

Sure, anyone with half a brain could Google that stuff themselves, but most are too lazy or don't think it's worth the bother. But I'm sure a few people might click on it and learn something, so every drop helps, however small.

- I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property [eff.org]

But what about the ebay customers? (1)

godIsaDJ (644331) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189419)

I understand that anyone gets what they deserve... And idiots thinking a 50$ necklace is a true Tiffany probably deserve to be scammed... But there are plenty of bargain hunters that despite having plenty of sense get stiffed... Some accountability on ebay side would be nice...

Re:But what about the ebay customers? (2, Insightful)

story645 (1278106) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189867)

*shrugs* They've got some cheaper collections where the pieces (new) are about a $100-$200, so I could possibly see some of the real pieces going for about $50 used. I think it's all about doing research, knowing the prices and what the real pieces look like. I ran a search on a necklace I own and most of the knockoffs are obvious.

I think accountability is a little hard 'cause there are also lots of people who want to resell real Tiffany's pieces and don't have proof, 'cause it was a gift or they bought it a long time ago or whatever.

Re:But what about the ebay customers? (1)

perlchild (582235) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190867)

And ebay claims that they're authentic how?
By claiming they're an auction house, they get responsible for the seller's description being fraudulent? Or is it that their paypal division(not involved in the auction, just the sale) didn't pay back fast enough the stinged buyer?

Or do you mean some other type of accountability? I mean, seriously, the only thing confusing is that eBay is an auction house, if you'd call them classified ads, you'd probably be closer to how involved they are in each transaction(but they'd compete with craigslist more). Or are you talking about paypal again(I only skimmed TFA and didn't see if maybe some other form of payment was used...)

Re:But what about the ebay customers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24191447)

Some accountability on ebay side would be nice...

Why does the cooperation or business always become responsible for individuals actions? Ebay does nothing more than provide a place for people to buy and sell items. They implement tools to help prevent fraud and make transactions secure yet you seem to think that they are still responsible in some way as if they were selling fake items them selves. What else would you like to blame? The government for allowing the sellers to live in their country or state?

If the problem is scammers then go after scammers, leave everyone else alone.

Re:But what about the ebay customers? (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#24195159)

I imagine that if you all you wanted a Rolex for was to impress the ladies, a fake Rolex would be as good as a real one. If you like Tiffiny stuff but can't afford the real thing, a fake would be the next best thing.

I call bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24189461)

It's interesting how ebay polices most auctions that they have an issue with, but then turn a blind eye to select auctions. I say all or nothing.....

Re:I call bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24190899)

eBay turns a blind eye to nothing.

The problem is the same as spam in your email, there is so much of it that you can not reasonably expect your email filters to catch all of it, and there is so much money to be made by sending spam that people who have nothing to lose or live in dubious countries like China or India where bootlegs are sold everywhere, just sell it till they are suspended, then create a new account.

Fakes cost eBay money in the PayPal dispute process or in employee time in handling complaints about sellers. It is in eBay's best interest to get rid of bad items and sellers, and fortunately eBay opts not to use the carpet bomb approach that rights owners demand. (which is "block all use of my trademark")

hmmm... (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189631)

Whatever the law states here, it's a sad day when eBay wins something.

Knowing eBay, and how much contempt they have for law, justice, and fairness, this win has to indicate that there is a deeper problem with the legal system.

Re:hmmm... (3, Insightful)

Boogaroo (604901) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189987)

Why would the rightness of a particular decision be related simply to the persons involved?

Re:hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24197975)

Maybe:

a) He believes in rule of man rather than rule of law.
b) Everyone who owlnation dislikes is wrong.
c) owlnation is 5 years old.
d) all of the above

deep blue something (4, Funny)

themushroom (197365) | more than 6 years ago | (#24189825)

I said 'What about eBaying Tiffany?'
And she said 'I think I've sold some before
And as I recall, I think we both made a profit'
So I said 'Well, that's one court case we've won.'

How does the case compare with the French one? (4, Interesting)

ulash (1266140) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190183)

Apart from the oblig. French jokes, does anyone know if the respective laws in France and the US regarding this matter are different enough to warrant the difference in verdicts, the interpretations of the judges are different, or the two cases are simply not that similar?

Re:How does the case compare with the French one? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24190749)

The france ruling effectively lets LVMH prevent the sale of it's brands on all websites. So no second hand market is allowed.

The US ruling says that Tiffany chose to sue eBay instead of the sellers and put little effort into the VeRO program.

LVMH and Tiffany are two of the most incompetent luxury brands when it comes to the internet. They make only a token use of the VeRO program and completely ignore intellectual property violations in some countries, which is why counterfeits are so abundant on sites like Hong Kong and Australia.

Other brands like Chanel are very competent and actually take down everything on eBay with the word 'Chanel' in it, including legitimate items that the seller put a half hearted attempt at listing. Try selling a Chanel item on eBay, you are likely to get it removed within hours by VeRO. If you try to sell a Louis Vuitton or Tiffany item ... if it gets removed at all it will be only after other eBay members lynch the seller using the "report this item" link.

eBay (itself) removes items suspected of being counterfeit, it does not have any information from Louis Vuitton about what to look for. The average eBay member reporting a fake LV or T&Co item knows more than eBay staff do. eBay staff (have to) stick to the "level playing field" mantra, and that means unless the rights owner reports the item, an item will only be removed if the seller fails to describe the item enough (in which it will be removed for being suspicious) or says too much and slips up.

Re:How does the case compare with the French one? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#24193543)

Other brands like Chanel are very competent and actually take down everything on eBay with the word 'Chanel' in it, including legitimate items

IANAL, but how does that stand up, and under what grounds? Does it overrule the doctrine of first sale?

Re:How does the case compare with the French one? (5, Informative)

t33jster (1239616) | more than 6 years ago | (#24192141)

I am an eBay employee, and not a lawyer or a PR team member, so the following opinion is useless drivel with a decided slant in favor of my employer. [/disclaimer]

The two cases are quite similar, but the laws in France protect French companies almost as much as they attempt to screw non-French companies. Remember the anti-competitive suit against Apple for selling iPods & music to go on them?

The cases are similar in that both plaintiffs are luxury goods makers that don't like the fact that the gray market (legit goods being resold) is obscuring the counterfeit market. The companies' solution is to attack a (the) central point where the black and gray markets collide. In attempting to do so, they demonstrate their failing to understand (or unwillingness to admit) that the black market has and will always exist.

In the US, this case has shown that the burden of protecting a trademark falls on the trademark holder, especially when the market is as willing as eBay has been (right or wrong) to remove auctions that trademark holder's believe violate their trademark. France has determined that the burden falls on the marketplace to ensure that the trademark holder's trademark is protected. The French case has shown that not only is eBay responsible for preventing the sale of counterfeit goods, it is also responsible for preventing the resale of legitimate goods that the manufacturer opposes. From my comment on the French ruling [slashdot.org] :

What's especially stupid about this is that if LV winds up forcing eBay out of this category, 100 new markets will open up. This has already started with the counterfeit sellers who have been forced off of eBay. Example: You can't buy a gun on eBay. I think it was after Columbine that eBay voluntarily exited the gun category. Since then there are a bunch of auction sites specifically for guns. By keeping one big market, it will be far easier for LV, Tiffany, and others to manage the counterfit & legit gray market. This is basically another example of an old company failing to understand online commerce.

Re:How does the case compare with the French one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24199129)

"The two cases are quite similar, but the laws in France protect French companies almost as much as they attempt to screw non-French companies. Remember the anti-competitive suit against Apple for selling iPods & music to go on them?"

I'm assuming by this, you are talking about the fact that French law works completely differently than common(English/American style) law, and companies that wish to do business in countries that use the French system often go right in and setup shop with out understanding the legal system at all and find themselves at a disadvantage to the local companies?

I'm sorry, but if you are going to do business in France, it's your own fault if you don't understand the legal system. Doing business in France has a lot of legal risk, they just assume you are guilty unless you can prove otherwise. Don't go there unless you are prepared.

Ha! I Told You!! (1)

Skeetskeetskeet (906997) | more than 6 years ago | (#24190463)

Took 20 years but Debbie Gibson has finally won!! Take that mall rat!!

counterfeit goods (5, Insightful)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 6 years ago | (#24191067)

The judge... said he was 'not unsympathetic' to Tiffany and others who have invested in building their brands only to see them exploited on the Web.

Yeah but they don't mind sending the production process over to a country that

a) exploits *their* workers
b) doesn't care about copyright

c) is prepared to make counterfeit goods from idle production time and undercut the company that outsourced the production process in the first place

Looks like those communist Chinese are learning how to be quite effective capitalists, what did Tiffany *expect* to happen. Except they don't go back to where and how the goods were produced noooooooo they go and sue a third party clogging up the legal system - what a mockery of the legal process. At least the judge used a foam club over the four year period.

Ebay is here to stay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24191275)

I recently had an issue with items purchased on ebay that were never delivered. Period. I was able to get all my money back from paypal, so that was a good thing, but don't for a minute think that ebay has any kind of control on the amount of fraud in its offerings.

I especially like the part where, if you're going to leave negative feedback (oooo, NEGATIVE FEEDBACK. That must be atomic!), it should not include personal attacks. You know, something like 'Hey this guy is a fucking fraud. Don't buy from him'.

Ebay just hopes you don't notice for long enough that the police state will devise some type of solution. Until then the creeps will just open up shop under another user name.

I still use ebay, but I have a new respect for the New York camera dealers of yore who I never met, whose English I could never understand, to whom I mailed thousands of dollars and by whom I was never cheated. Never even once.

Tiffany should've hired some CoS lawyers (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | more than 6 years ago | (#24191523)

It's funny that eBay will defend the sale of bootleg products but has caved into the Scientologists on the sale of e-meters and authorized copies of church literature. Obviously the difference here is that the volume of bootleg stuff far outweighs the amount of CoS materials available for sale. The fake stuff is too much of a profit source for eBay to walk away from. The good news is that eBay obviously won't mind if you put a bootleg e-meter up for sale.

Re:Tiffany should've hired some CoS lawyers (2, Interesting)

ps2os2 (1216366) | more than 6 years ago | (#24191939)

Yes that is interesting I agree. But on the other hand I can see the horde of lawyers being unleashed on EBAY. Whenever religion rears it *UGLY* head everyone runs for cover and poor EBAY would be out on a limb. I actually feel a little sorry for EBAY(in this instance only) they are in a truly no win situation. Religion is treated (like in other countries) differently in the US (I really don't care what side you are on). Some countries are nut cakes (and attract the same) and you couldn't get a honest verdict out of the justice system if you tried. Then you have the US where it comes down (in reality) to which judge you get on trial date. Sure there a few reasonably honest judges out there but probably less than we would think:( I hate to say this but probably when it comes to religion the jewish judges would be the best to hear any case to decide it on its merits and not on biblical leanings.

Re:Tiffany should've hired some CoS lawyers (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#24192437)

You're right, it's obviously the volume and not the fact that selling legitimate Tiffany jewelry wouldn't be grounds for a lawsuit whereas any selling of the Church of Scientology's equipment would be grounds for a lawsuit.

I'm no friend of EBay or the CoS, but come on, these are two very different issues. If Tiffany was trying to pull all their jewelry from the site regardless of authenticity (like the CoS does), then this would be a very different story.

Ruling (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 6 years ago | (#24192025)

Well I hope the plaintiffs will be ordered to cook eBay a hearty breakfast too.

fuc]ker (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24192105)

All Fake (3, Interesting)

saihung (19097) | more than 6 years ago | (#24192419)

I don't know. I'm kind of tired of doing a search for designer suits and finding page after page of obvious Chinese-made ripoffs. And to make matters worse, eBay makes you jump through hoops to report fakes - the "report" link goes to a FAQ page instead of a real report link. I actually wrote to eBay about this sub-optimal behavior, and they wrote back that they were under no obligation to listen to my suggestions.

Re:All Fake (3, Informative)

DragonPup (302885) | more than 6 years ago | (#24194491)

I've tried reporting obvious counterfeits to ebay, and sellers selling nothing but them. To date, eBay has not removed a single item i reported or any seller. Why would eBay care? They make money off of each sale, but nothing off a pulled listing.

Re:All Fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24196895)

dude, if you've characterized their reply correctly, I'd so love to see it. can you reply with the text of their letter back to you, if you still have it? Thanks.

Re:All Fake (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 6 years ago | (#24200113)

I'm kind of tired of doing a search for designer suits and finding page after page of obvious Chinese-made ripoffs.

Really?

Do you complain about the lack of designer suits at garage sales and flea markets, too? Because that's all eBay is, just a big yard sale online.

Not to excuse the knock offs and counterfeits, but why are you looking for designer suits on eBay?

Not buying from them again anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24193533)

Having bought a necklace for my wife (yes, really - a wife), we returned home and waited for the certificate of authenticity that they promised.

Two phone calls and two letters later - nothing.

Tiffany UK don't want to know as the purchase was made in Las Vegas.

As much as she (hopefully) won't sell them, making a big-ticket purchase should ensure you get top quality customer service.

Next time I'll buy from eBay and pocket the change!

Re:Not buying from them again anyway (1)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#24195683)

Having bought a necklace for my wife (yes, really - a wife), we returned home and waited for the certificate of authenticity that they promised.

What's the difference between a wife and a job? After ten years the job still sucks.

eBay is digging a big hole (4, Insightful)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 6 years ago | (#24193585)

Auction houses in the real world depend for their success on reputation. They employ experts, real experts, to check the provenance of anything of any value. eBay is not a true auction house; it is a vehicle for the sale of stolen and counterfeit goods. Which means that, no matter what happens in the US today, eventually someone will come after it. Perhaps in the next big share collapse the real auction houses and goods manufacturers will buy its shares and simply shut it down; perhaps the Chinese will do what the US did, change from a country that encourages piracy to one that tries to stop it, and take action.

In the meantime eBay has created a hole for a real on-line auction system. It would be quite difficult to set up, require heavy means of seller verification, but provide a way to sell high value items securely.

Not that I am defending the "luxury goods manufacturers" who themselves are now fake. "Burberry", for instance, is just another Chinese knock off shop, while Barbour and Mulberry in the UK are real local manufacturers. Burberry has destroyed some of the value in the real manufacturers by its faking. It's Gresham's Law in action. There really should be a law that all vendors must state clearly in any advertisement what the main country of manufacture of their goods actually is.

Re:eBay is digging a big hole (1)

Beyond_GoodandEvil (769135) | more than 6 years ago | (#24194257)

There really should be a law that all vendors must state clearly in any advertisement what the main country of manufacture of their goods actually is.
By Jingo, you're right there ought to be a law!

Re:eBay is digging a big hole (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24205941)

Check out portero.com. They fill that hole. They verify the seller, or even the items themselves.

Pull stuff out your butt much? (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 6 years ago | (#24195047)

If this had gone the other way, not only would eBay be in trouble (especially after the loss of a similar case in France), but so would Net commerce as a whole.

How would Net commerce as a whole be in trouble if the ruling went against eBay?

Next up: Debbie Gibson (1)

TomatoMan (93630) | more than 6 years ago | (#24195735)

Go get her, eBay!

(and I hear Samantha Fox is pretty unhappy with eBay too)

Correct decision (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | more than 6 years ago | (#24195739)

The judge here should be applauded. While he understood where Tiffany was coming from, he correctly chose NOT to legislate from the bench by siding with them.

Re:Correct decision (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#24217471)

The judge here should be applauded. While he understood where Tiffany was coming from, he correctly chose NOT to legislate from the bench by siding with them.

Agreed. This was a landmark decision, from a good judge, who exercised judgment and clarity.

welcome to the efraud kingdom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24196929)

where knockoffs and fakes run their little corner of the universe, and the law could care less about all those being fucked out of their money.

I have to wonder if any judge that makes rulings like this either has head up ass or worse, has a hand in the fraud.

Oh well, I never buy anything off ebay and refuse to sell on it.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?