Slashdot Mirror
eBay Beats Tiffany In Net Trademark Case
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."
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?
Support a few technologists in Washington.
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.
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.
*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.
open source modern art: laser taggi
Why would the rightness of a particular decision be related simply to the persons involved?
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.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
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.
Yeah but they don't mind sending the production process over to a country that
a) exploits *their* workers b) doesn't care about copyrightc) 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.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
> 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
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.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."