Slashdot Mirror
eBay Describes the Scale of Its Counterfeit Goods Problem
Ian Lamont writes "As the Tiffany vs. eBay lawsuit winds its way through a federal appeals court, eBay has trotted out some numbers that show how many sellers attempt to sell fake goods on the auction site. Millions of auctions were delisted last year, and tens of thousands of accounts were suspended after reports were made to eBay's Verified Rights Owner program, which lets trademark owners notify eBay of fake goods being sold on the site. eBay says 100% of reported listings were removed from the site last year, most within 12 hours, and the company uses sellers' background information to make sure that they don't create new accounts to sell delisted items. Tiffany brought the suit against eBay in 2004, alleging that eBay was turning a blind eye to counterfeit luxury goods and demanding that eBay police its listings for bogus goods. Tiffany lost the case last July and will shortly present its arguments to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York. A similar case in France cost eBay $61 million."
If anything, Ebay is already too far on the side of "protecting" the various merchants who pretty much hate First Sale. The web abounds with tales of perfectly legitimate stuff being taken down, with approximately the same care shown in DMCA request cases.
Given that, I'd really hate to see what the situation would look like if Ebay's enemies win.
Some counterfeit products stem from overruns. I.e. Lee commissions an order for 500 pairs of jeans from a factory, the factory gets sent 600 logos and makes 600 pairs of jeans. They get paid for the original 500 count jean order and then turn around and sell the real deal (same factory, same material and techniques, same quality, real logo) to the black market. Except the additional 100 pairs are counterfeit (Legally so).
Sounds like a perfectly reasonable excuse to prevent a legit buyer of a pair of the original 500 jeans from reselling their product... Lets lawyer up!
Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
Quite possibly. There's no good solution, and there are vested interests on both sides. eBay makes a cut of every sale, so they want as many as they can, no matter what the legitimacy of the items being sold. Tiffany makes nothing from second hand sales, so they'd love to destroy any market for them. Counterfeiting probably is more damaging to Tiffany than a legitimate resale market, but if they weren't angling to stop all 'unauthorised' sales of their products I doubt they'd be bringing a lawsuit where the only real solution is to ban any Tiffany products from eBay.
eBay can very easily be written off as assholes for a multitude of valid reasons, but for once I think we've got a situation where they can't be blamed. Short of manually approving every single auction there's not much more they can do to keep out the obvious fakes. Now add to that the ones that can't be spotted a mile off by anyone with a bit of experience and it's like asking them to send a team of experts to your house and confirm that the item you just listed is indeed genuine. Good luck with that.
You expected to get legitimate Gillette Fusion razor blades from a Chinese eBay seller?
Slashdot is missing a -1 Dumbass moderating option.
I'm possibly missing something blindingly obvious here, but what's the benefit of the eBay step in the insurance fraud scam? Just to make it look like they have a more legitimate reason for keeping 8 PS3s in their living room before they were 'robbed'?
Actually, they probably aren't paid per item (too easy for them to game the system) but they are just overzealous by default because that is better for them over all. For one, they probably give the companies reports that say "We stopped X number of illegal sales this month!" The bigger the number, the happier the company. Also should someone from the company notice things that are not getting taken down, the company will get mad and say "What the hell are we paying you for?"
Only way that a company is likely to get mad about them being over zealous is if one of their major distributors gets mad for it happening. Problem is, that the major distributors aren't going to rely on eBay. They might use it, but their large volume will be elsewhere. Thus the company isn't likely to get complaints of sufficient level that they'll do anything about it.
there is no way to know if its real or not.
If that's the case, sounds pretty good to me. I'm going to start doing my shopping on eBay. ;)
I don't consider myself much of a capitalist, but I find it interesting that a company can have a product that another company reproduces for less (at the same quality), but can't compete with them. Why is that? I know regulations help level the playing field, but in a cold way, the consumer wins if another company can create the same product for less. I think typically though, products like this are of inferior quality - maybe the product itself, support etc...
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
Most buyers can't tell the difference. For the most part, they are getting a bargain because they think it is a Rolex or Louis Vutton, but it isn't really. They aren't paying for the real thing.
In a few cases, they buyer ends up feeling like a sucker because they try to sell their "bargain" to someone that knows the difference. So instead of making 10x their original investment, they learn their watch isn't "real". Well, it tells time, right?
Because of the price difference, the overpriced only-for-the-rich names are going to disappear. So in 10 years when you can't buy a new (real) Rolex anymore for $8,000 but you can buy all the fake ones you want for $80. Who is the loser here? Maybe the rich folks, but I can't see anyone on Slashdot giving a rat's ass about that.
With the Internet you make the distribution of these goods almost untracable, so there is no risk to the seller from the police. The police being used to enforce the only-for-the-rich prices for brand names. So you get a Rolex for $80 and it will last just as long as any other $80 watch - but it says Rolex on it. If your ego requires you to have brand names, this lets you do it without paying vastly inflated prices for useless names. The name doesn't make it any better, after all.
... for not preventing street side sellers.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Sure, they can assume whatever they want -- but their unfounded assumptions shouldn't interfere with anyone else's ability to buy or sell; nor should it be deemed sufficient grounds to suspend anyone's eBay account.
If they think the product is fake they should have no trouble backing that claim up with evidence. Even then, it's the defrauded buyers that should be pressing claims, not the purported manufacturer.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
Because they know that x of the labels or jeans that the labels are sewn to are going to be imperfect, and it's more cost effective to ship an extra percentage point of raw materials the first time, than have to deal with shipping another small batch if the shop couldn't meet their quota.
In that case, Lee should ask and pay for 600 items, and accept up to 100 bad ones. They'll get their 500 pairs of jeans, and there won't be any logos to counterfeit.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Let's say that the Nintendo Wii retails for $250. But you were going to sell them on eBay for $450 a piece and because of retail scarcity people bought them. Then you go through the scam I outlined above. When you make a claim with your insurance company, because people have used PayPal to transfer you $450, you can try to claim a loss of $450 instead of the loss of replacing a $250 machine.
It's known as the 3rd shift, and it's not 100 of 500, it's more like 1/3 (absolute minimum if you have something made in China) to 2/3 of all production.
Perfectly legal (there) and perfectly "real" goods. Welcome to China.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
eBay doesn't actually sell anything.
It's an abuse of the legal system to allow these companies to go after ebay for counterfeit goods. How about going after the people committing the offence?
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
>>>The seller and Paypal then instruct you to bug UPS for insurance money
Bzzzz. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The seller might tell you to get insurance, but Paypal always gives the exact-same answer: "Return to seller." You can then provide the delivery confirmation/tracking number to paypal and they will refund all your money. Or you can provide it to your credit card, and they will do the same.
Also, "it got damaged during shipping" is NOT an excuse for a seller. The seller is responsible for ALL damage, whether he did it himself or the mailman did it, therefore the seller must refund your money. And if he doesn't paypal or your credit card will do it.
I once received a cracked LCD screen, and the seller tried to pulled the "I'm not responsible" and "go claim insurance" scam. I said "WRONG" and immediately returned the screen. The seller ended-up losing the sale, having to pay additional postage for delivery (since I deliberately mailed without sufficient stamps), and got a nasty negative.
>>>I had one synthesizer that was in "fully functional condition" arrive with two broken keys - sure, that MIGHT have happened in transit
Too bad, so sad. It's still the seller's responsibility to deliver the item advertised.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
True, however laziness shouldn't be a legitimate excuse for doing things the wrong way.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"