posted on September 12, 2000 04:46:45 PM new
I don't know how to attach a Word file to open it from AOL or I would print a copy of the Waverly letter here on this board....but here is an interesting relevant quote:
"First of all, let me assure you that you were not singled out by FSC. (FSC is F.SChumacher & Co.) FSC conducts periodic "sweeps" of the Internet to police unauthorized use of its trademarks and copyrights, and your auction was one of several dozens that were terminated in this particular "sweep." With respect to eBay, FSC has tried repeatedly to obtain its assurances that it would not allow auctions that infringe on our Company's trademarks or copyrights, or that otherwise wrongfully interfere with the contractual relationships we have with our authorized dealers. However, eBay has consistently refused to help, leaving it up to the owner of intellectual property rights to police the eBay site on a case-by )(sic)case basis. Given the hundreds of auctions that take place each day on eBay, it is not realistic to expect a company (and ours is no exception) to monitor each auction and contact each seller every day on an individual basis.
BTW, this form response was addressed as follows:
To: eBay sellers
Kinda generic, don't you think?! Kinda disengenous don't you think?!
posted on September 13, 2000 08:52:13 AM new
I'd like to thank abacaxi for bringing in the references showing how unsupportable many Vero claims are.
Vero overkill seems to be rampant and I'd sure like to see some of it called to task. Vero is supposed to be about copyright infringements, using it instead to attempt to control or restrict the resale of perfectly legitimate merchandise is abusive.
Vero overkill seems to be rampant and I'd sure like to see some of it called to task.
It seems extremely unlikely that Waverly/FSC would actually file suit on their claim that any photograph containing Waverly fabric infringes. Nor would any of the so many other outrageously frivilous vero actions we've been hearing about ...
However, if such were to occur, the idea that the reseller could safely fight without bothering with professional legal representation just doesn't pass any sanity tests.
