If they lose the appeal, eBay will most likely just institute an outright ban on the listing of those items.
They did that for guns, pets, used panties, and God knows what else, so they'll just add these to the list.
What do they care if a boatload of sellers get put out of business overnight?
That kind of "shoot 'em all, and let God sort 'em out" mentality is right up the eBay corporate alley.

Yeah. Like eBay forcing people to use PayPal. Totally wouldn't fly.

ganda said:The judgement was not only regarding counterfeit goods, but selling their genuine goods outside their authorized dealer network. That is such BS and I'm sure that wouldn't fly here.

why not? Manufacturer has legal power to limit sale/resale of their products only to licensed dealers.

EmptyWallet said:ganda said: Manufacturer has legal power to limit sale/resale of their products only to licensed dealers.

Maybe Debeers should limit resale on diamonds?
Maybe Ford should limit resale on cars?

Come on.... Any item of value will be resold.

I side against eBay on this issue - there were by far too many people selling knock offs of Tiffany items.

Maybe it'd be OK for used ones but not the brand new one.

madcowdisease said:locomodem said:[L=Link]


-Get ready for a fee increase.


How is this lawsuit connected with increased fees? I really don't understand your logic. Assuming eBay doesn't appeal, (which they will) $63 million is part of a one-time cost that comes out of earnings and is largely discounted by shareholders as a cost.

Add to that, shareholders have already known about this suit and all pending litigation against eBay. Companies typically set aside money to deal with legal costs and judgments to prevent these from adversely affecting their operations and potentially initiating a cash crunch.[/L]

Potentially, it may mean higher fees due to lost sales (lost listing, Final Value Fees, and Paypal Fees). While it is true that shareholders have an understanding of the suit. The shareholder and investor in general has no idea the impact of the lost of listings. So eBay may have to rely on increasing fees in other areas to compensate for the lost revenue. Hence, higher fees.

ganda said:EmptyWallet said:ganda said:The judgement was not only regarding counterfeit goods, but selling their genuine goods outside their authorized dealer network. That is such BS and I'm sure that wouldn't fly here.

why not? Manufacturer has legal power to limit sale/resale of their products only to licensed dealers.

No it doesn't. Once the goods belong to me I can do with them as I wish - burn them, sell them on eBay, whatever - it is MY property.

Absolutely agree with you. But while it is legal by law for you to sell these bags, eBay has the right to stop sales of ANYTHING on their site. Heck, if tomorrow their "think tank" of monkeys will decide that all they want to deal with is new merchandise they can close down all listing with the word "USED" in them and there's nothing nobody could do about it. Their site - their rules.

ganda said:EmptyWallet said:ganda said:The judgement was not only regarding counterfeit goods, but selling their genuine goods outside their authorized dealer network. That is such BS and I'm sure that wouldn't fly here.

why not? Manufacturer has legal power to limit sale/resale of their products only to licensed dealers.

No it doesn't. Once the goods belong to me I can do with them as I wish - burn them, sell them on eBay, whatever - it is MY property.

This is incorrect. While i am not a lawyer but it has got something to do with division of property rights. A company can limit on what rights it gives to its customers. Most often the company may give you a right to use but not the right to resell (e.g. softwares or Dell computers etc) or rent (e.g. movies). Similarly when you buy a house you may get a right to use the house but not the right to dig on the land or modify the house. If you want you can purchase these rights but they do not come automatically.

Likewise when you buy a car, you may get a right to drive and use the car but not the right to modify the design. Most often the infrigements are small enough that its not worth for the companies to pursue it.

But incase of these overpriced merchandise we are talking about... eh.. overpriced merchandise. They may have some clause somewhere in their contract saying that your buying their stuff means you cannot resell or something.

If someone has an alternate view let me know.

starcrossed said:ganda said:EmptyWallet said:ganda said:The judgement was not only regarding counterfeit goods, but selling their genuine goods outside their authorized dealer network. That is such BS and I'm sure that wouldn't fly here.

why not? Manufacturer has legal power to limit sale/resale of their products only to licensed dealers.

No it doesn't. Once the goods belong to me I can do with them as I wish - burn them, sell them on eBay, whatever - it is MY property.


But incase of these overpriced merchandise we are talking about... eh.. overpriced merchandise. They may have some clause somewhere in their contract saying that your buying their stuff means you cannot resell or something.

If someone has an alternate view let me know.

Sure will

Have you read the contract you agree to when you buy a Louis Vuitton wallet at Macy's? There isn't one of course. It's a wallet, you bought it, it is now yours to with as you please.

Software is a different case since you *do* agree to a license when you install the product.