Seeing Fakes, Angry Traders Confront EBay: Will Tiffany Force eBay to Change?

[xppman]

This goes right back to what many of us have said all along about the
cloaking of all ebay users identities until after the sale and the
lack of any TRUE VERIFICATION process of it's members.
Not to mention that they allow one person to have MANY ID's.

This is all self serving and makes ebay money.

I think this is what has fueled this
breeding ground of not only counterfeiting rings
and scammers but shill bidding rings as well.

There is no doubt that eBay has known for a long time
that counterfeits, scammers and shill bidding was increasing
at an alarming rate on their site.

By their own actions that is apparent.
One example is the BPP and SPP they introduced shortly
after buying out PayPal.

WHY WOULD THEY FEEL THE NEED TO INTRODUCE ALL
THIS CARP TO MAKE EVERYONE FEEL SO "SAFE" TO TRADE ON
EBAY IF THEY DID NOT ALREADY KNOW THERE WERE
SOME SERIOUS PROBLEMS CONCERNING
TRUST AND SAFETY?

Both ebay and PayPal have chosen to NOT be proactive
in combating this phenomena for a long time.

Instead they took the usual path of trying to capitalize on the situation
and TRYING to further insulate themselves of any liability.

There is NO way with all the data ebay collects that the
top executives of ebay did not AND do not know what is going on.

Many have us have begged them for a long time to:

1) Tighten up their lax registration polices.
2) Do away with all this multiple ID carp.
3) Allow potential buyers and sellers to be able to know
who they are dealing with PRIOR to a sale.

I hope that Tiffany opens up the flood gates and would love to see many more suits follow.

If ebay wishes to maintain this "We are just a venue" BS
then they need to throw thier policies pages right out the window and replace it with:

BUYERS AND SELLERS BEWARE. TRADE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
We are just a venue...


 

[bargainbloodhound]

2) Do away with all this multiple ID carp.
3) Allow potential buyers and sellers to be able to know
who they are dealing with PRIOR to a sale.

Do away with user IDs for sellers period and just use real business names. 

[regic]

Auctionbytes has an op-ed article today on the Tiffany suit:

As Tiffany's lawsuit against eBay gets closer to trial, it has inspired many a doomsayer to challenge the continued viability of eBay's business model. If eBay facilitates counterfeiting, Tiffany argues, they should be held accountable or not exist. Like many companies with lofty pedigrees, Tiffany is acting on fears of more than counterfeiting. They want to clamp down on the online trade of their branded goods - both counterfeit and real - because they fear losing control over the distribution of their products in the face of a growing secondary market. But strategies based on fears never work.

Fighting auction culture today is tantamount to the bricks-and-mortar businesses that tried to block the proliferation of ecommerce in the late 90s. There is no stopping it. Business leaders don't have to like eBay, but if they want their brands to thrive, they will have to accept its legitimacy as one of the world's largest and fastest growing channels of commerce...

full article: http://auctionbytes.com/cab/abu/y206/m05/abu0167/s05

[mandy]

Latest updates in the eBay vs. Tiffany counterfeit lawsuit:

When Tiffany & Co. sued eBay in 2004, it said 73% of items purchased on eBay in a study it conducted were counterfeit. eBay wants the testimony of Tiffany's expert excluded due to the methodology in coming up with those statistics.

On October 6, 2006, eBay filed a motion in limine (http://digbig.com/4qknn) to exclude the proposed expert testimony of George Mantis, a survey expert hired by Tiffany to design random buying programs for the purchase of Tiffany silver merchandise on eBay...

full article: http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y06/m12/i22/s03

[mandy]

update: eBay wins

Jewelry maker Tiffany & Co. failed to convince a judge that eBay was not doing enough to fight counterfeiting on its site. When Tiffany sued eBay in 2004, it said 73% of items purchased on eBay in a study it conducted were counterfeit. Two years later, eBay launched an anti-counterfeiting initiative that may have helped sway the judge, who heard the case last year and issued his opinion on Monday. The win for eBay comes after it lost a similar lawsuit last month in France filed by LVMH.

US District Judge Richard J. Sullivan said the heart of the dispute was not whether counterfeit Tiffany jewelry should flourish on eBay, but rather, who should bear the burden of policing Tiffany's trademarks in Internet commerce.

The Court found that eBay was not liable for contributory trademark infringement...

full article: http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y08/m07/i14/s01

[mandy]

update: Tiffany appeals

Tiffany & Co. announced it has filed an appeal in the eBay counterfeiting lawsuit in which the judge found that eBay was not liable for contributory trademark infringement.

Patrick Dorsey, general counsel, Tiffany & Co., said, "Unfortunately, the trial court incorrectly held that trademark holders and not eBay are responsible for policing the eBay site. The effect of this is that eBay can continue to profit at the expense of consumers and trademark holders. In our view, this approach makes no sense as a matter of law or policy...

full article: http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y08/m08/i12/s01

A related article: E-Commerce and Brand Protection: A Two-Way Street

The Internet has been compared to the Wild West of the United States during the Gold Rush years -- the promise and allure for business is great, but so is the potential for corruption and abuse.

While the Internet enables entrepreneurs and small businesses to compete with big businesses by having access to a global distribution channel for legal and authentic items, it also connects crooks with unsuspecting customers to erode the brand value of legitimate businesses. This and the 24/7 nature of the Internet dictate brands must be ever vigilant and ever diligent -- regardless of the country in which they operate.

LVMH's recent success in France demonstrates to frustrated brands worldwide that an aggressive litigation strategy can pay off. While the full impact of this victory remains to be seen, it's given that establishing solid Web brand protection programs and aggressively pursuing criminals will be part of brand protection for years to come...

full article: http://ecommercetimes.com/story/E-Commer...64104.html