posted on January 25, 2001 05:18:17 PM new
I think this thread begins to dovetail with another one active right now commenting on Ebay clarifying that even AFTER an auction has ended, it's still auction interference for a user to contact the winner or other bidders with what they consider relevant info, in this case it would be, "Do you realize there's no Playstation IN that box?" I think relevant here also is a very recent court ruling I saw in which Ebay was upheld in its "only a venue" position and held not responsible for disputes and misrepresentations.
Very interesting... Ebay has a vested interest, that is, in collecting its fees, in seeing that any auction bid up to a high level gets officially finalized despite circumstances that might even include obvious outright fraud. Now they're exercising leverage that tells interested and ethical users that there are penalties if ANYONE exposes fraudulent auctions to the dupes. Is there a point at which Ebay is in effect *participating* in fraud?? Has this recent ruling sheltered them by its precedent from such questions being raised in new legal proceedings, leaving them free to shelter scamsters on their site?
So are people supposed to sit silently on seeing egregious fraud being perpretrated, or be forced into a financially painful situation of being NARU'd as, in effect, a conscientious objector?
Edited to replace a possibly confusing "closed" with "finalized"
posted on January 25, 2001 05:24:35 PM new
Yep, I found the third one. Two have identical titles, different seller id's and slightly different descriptions.
I'll email the three active auctions I found to Maui, and if Nana has the same three, Maui can let us know.
posted on January 25, 2001 05:25:55 PM newtopdog12 At the risk of getting suspended, which I cannot afford to do, I won't email them but someone else just did!
Meya got it, thanks!
Meya just clicked the item number you sent me and it came back invalid. Shut down, I hope!
[ edited by cmbtboots on Jan 25, 2001 05:27 PM ]
[ edited by cmbtboots on Jan 25, 2001 05:29 PM ]
posted on January 25, 2001 05:26:39 PM new
I'm afraid I have to agree with jadejim. The title and description are exactly what they're bidding on. Those things are very straight forward.
It's the bidder's responsibility to watchout for himself and READ what is in the description. If you look at any of those titles and descriptions, none of them are saying "in box" which is what a majority of the other PX2 auctions are saying, when they come in the box. Any bidder, should be able to see this, if they actually sat down and read through things, rather than having happy bidding fingers.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like to see fraud happening online........ and even though the auctions, I've seen, are not necessarily "misleading".... I do believe that the original intent of the seller is to commit fraud.
At the same time, what's happening now is a bunch of netcops are running around committing auction interferrence. Do two wrongs really make a right? Are you going to scream foul when someone emails your bidders because they believe you're committing some sort of fraud and they want to protect your customers?
posted on January 25, 2001 05:31:25 PM new
Wow! That's one for the recordbooks. While seemingly not, in the strictest sense, indicating an actual PS2 unit is inside, I nonetheless feel it demonstrates deceptive intent.
The sentences were run-ons, which usually triggers caution in me, to make sure at the least that this doesn't allow ambiguity in what I'd receive. The picture (which has disappeared since yesterday) was of a closed, seemingly sealed box. There were no clarifiers to speak of. No "this is of the BOX ONLY" statements.
Yes, more of the bidders should have stopped and looked more closely at the wording, or questioned why someone would include their receipt. Of course, a lot probably did.
Any seller only selling a box for a legitimate purpose would know of the potential confusion, if they had a single iota of common sense, and take pains to avoid misinterpretation. One example, a hybrid of several I've seen in the past, could be such as this:
Title: "Eastern airliner model's BOX"
Desc.: "This is the BOX (and ONLY the box) that an Eastern airliner model came in. I have no idea where the model airplane itself is anymore, but thought someone might like the box's really cool artwork. Again, this auction is for the empty BOX pictured here."
I have no idea, however, what the letter of the law is on mail fraud, on whether fraud only comprises breaking the explicit wording of the ad (which in this case, it doesn't seem to, but I don't know how ad wording is parsed in a legal setting), or breaking the implicit wording (which many, especially at first glance, would take as including the actual electronic unit). For all I know, there may be laws already on the books over the sale of empty boxes, because it would seem to me this could be an old problem.
I mean if a computer software store put an ad in the newspaper or a catalogue, showing the outside of a software product's box (what is usually done, after all), you paid the sale price, and were given a box....
Of course, this auction did say "box," but so do a lot of eBay ads, because in the world of collectibles, having the box is often something too mention, and many ads show the item intentionally left in the unopened box. Brevity of title space often leads to abbreviation, but this seller carried run-ons into the description.
A few more cases like this, and this will only further erode people's trust in buying through eBay.
(And yes, on a somewhat different subtopic mentioned in this thread, I agree with whoever pointed out how meaningless the phrase "lifetime guarantee" alone is. Unless the granter further describes it as a particular warranty that guarantees if something fails within a certain timeframe, that it will be repaired or replaced at no cost to the customer, the phrase by itself is meaningless. Treat the words "lifetime guarantee" as hype, to either clarify or avoid. )
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
posted on January 25, 2001 05:35:45 PM new
I sent all three of these auctions to safe harbor for them to "just" investigate them. One is gone (the one I sent about an hour ago)....that was fast. Now we will see about the other two.
posted on January 25, 2001 05:41:40 PM new
I am really tempted to email the original buyer to invite him/her into this conversation, but perhaps someone else already has. Actually, not real sure how to do that anyway.
posted on January 25, 2001 05:42:35 PM newrosiebud I really hope you are not ever the victim of fraud.
At the risk of sounding ignorant, there was a couple times I did not totally read all the auction details. There was an item I bid on and I read the description too fast and mistook the shipping charges for the handling charges and was totally shocked with my final total. Things like this do happen in the real world.
AND at risk of not following the rules I think it is more UNETHICAL to sit and watch and do nothing while innocent people are being scammed by these A-Holes than to play netcop and let them in on what is happening.
I would certainly be grateful some someone emailed me if I was a bidder on these auctions.
Like I said, I hope you are never in the position of buying a $400.00 box (or whatever)
JUST MY OPINION
peace
[ edited by cmbtboots on Jan 25, 2001 05:45 PM ]
posted on January 25, 2001 05:44:39 PM new
I am a relatively gullible and naive person. I want to thank all you people for your comments about empty boxes legitimately offered at auction. Doing such a thing never occured to me, because actually that is really a "cheat" too. The reason the box is valuable is because an item, a specific item, came in THAT box. Not another similar box, but THAT box. Selling just the box allows someone else to give the impression that their fine collectible came in THAT particular box. HUM-M-M. Never ever thought of that, but now I know and I am not quite so gullible any more. You may think I am being sarcastic but I am not. I am sincere.I shall no longer be impressed about a box being availible when I am searching for the older collectible teapots that I love. Thank you again.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:08:37 PM new
cmbtboots ~ I never said to sit back and do nothing..... I said those who are committing auction interference by emailing the bidders are doing something wrong. There are other ways to do something, without breaking the rules.... but it's obvious that some people could not think of the LEGAL avenues before turning to the ILLEGAL avenues.
IMO, there are those who evade paying taxes ~ by being paid under the table ~ for many years, ~ are in no position to speak of ethics, legality, and/or "protecting" anyone. Course, that's all in my opinion.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:09:13 PM new
this is unreal! I called Ebay today the frau division, and left my name, and the offending auctions, including the neru one. Hopefully they will do something. If EBAY does nothing, they are just as guilty.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:12:28 PM newrosiebud: True, some bidders need to read descriptions and feedback better, but I expect it would not occur to some people to suspect such scams. Yet that does not excuse sellers either. In regard to sales, both sides have responsibilities, or at least most people unconsciously expect them to have such; in regard to enforcement issues, middle ground must exist there too (VEROs have demonstrated how a law meant to better enforce already existing laws can become its own form of abuse at times, but zero enforcement or zero laws lead to complete lack of usuable frameworks).
"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." This saying too admits there are two sides.
As to enforcement, maybe the seller broke some laws already, or maybe eBay will have to add some silly-sounding but perhaps now necessary rules on the sales of boxes, such as the seller having to clearly and explicitly state "This auction is for the BOX only!"
posted on January 25, 2001 06:23:46 PM new
I believe there is a difference in the "Letter of the Law" and the "Spirit of the Law" in this case.
When eBay fusses about Auction Interference, they are talking about sellers who wish to sabotage other sellers by spreading lies and rumors etc. about another seller, with the intent of gaining something.
Emailing someone with no motive on your own part is totally different. If you or I or anyone should email and warn a bidder of a potential scam, and we have nothing to gain, there should not be a problem.
It is the intent of the email, as well as the intent of the "box" auctions that is the point here.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:25:38 PM new
rosiebud: You said "some people could not think of the LEGAL avenues before turning to the ILLEGAL avenues. "
Me, I don't assign Ebay the right to make regulations that carry the weight appropriate for words like "legal" and "illegal." I grant that right to governments, but not to an arrogant, newly-created dot-com corporation. We're talking about internal Ebay rules which might well themselves be of truly questionable legality given rulings on freedom of speech and responsibilities to prevent fraud. I'd agree to disagree if it were said one should follow the rules or just go elsewhere, and I suppose it's reasonably clear that's more what you mean?
Edited upon looking at how I spelled a word....
[ edited by pyth00n on Jan 25, 2001 06:29 PM ]
posted on January 25, 2001 06:26:17 PM new
dc9a320 ~ I don't argue that anything excuses the seller. (In case I did not say it, I do believe that the intent was to deceive the bidders) But in this case.. because it's really the only auction that I've looked it, it IS obvious (and carefully constructed) that the auction is only for a box. There is no punctuation until after the word "receipt". I'm not talking the title, I'm talking the description.
This is a auction for the playstation 2 original box and receipt.Shipping is Free.I accept paypal.
There are no commas. As if you can't tell, I'm horrible with punctuation but I do know comma placement with multiple items. If I don't see commas, I don't assume commas.
That's the problem, in this case the high bidder and other bidders assumed:
This is a auction for the playstation 2, original box, and receipt.
(last comma is optional) That setup would mean three seperate items. As it is originally it is only 2 items.
ASSUMPTIONS ARE A BIDDER'S WORSE ENEMY and a scammers best friend.
Now, true, the seller is a scammer........... but technically the auction is correct.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:44:02 PM new
pyth00n ~ a law is just a rule of society.
Meya:
If you or I or anyone should email and warn a bidder of a potential scam, and we have nothing to gain, there should not be a problem.
Ya think? If that's the case, than why do people use alias email addresses to warn others of fraud? If that's the case, than why did nanastuff say on page two:
At the risk of getting in a bunch of trouble, I already did email the current bidder on the other auction.
What trouble? Surely she had nothing to gain?
If you're so right about this, than it won't matter, if you and everyone else who's already done it..... go searching ebay tomorrow and each find 30 auctions that are "fraudulent" and email the bidders from your regular ebay email address.. don't forget to CC Safeharbor in your emails so they can thank you for your efforts. Be sure to find auctions that you would have "nothing to gain" if they were ended. I'm sure ebay won't mind.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:50:48 PM newrosiebud: I would say or agree that netcops are no replacement for common sense. The middle ground is that buyers should think before bidding, and sellers should be called on egregious abuses. Enough rules for a framework, but not a straightjacket (sp? ).
I'm a writer (sort of), so half a glance would be enough for me to spot the run-on and get suspicious enough to look and realize what the lack of comments do to the meaning, whether pre-warned or not. The 39 bidders should have seen it too, but I guess I was saying all the run-ons and other poor grammar on eBay does tend to lower people's expectations and perhaps defenses, or were new and naive to the problems of eBay. Neither fact is an excuse for either the bidders or the seller, but a statement of possible fact.
My friends can fairly easily pull jokes on me or otherwise fool me, but when I come to the consumer aspects of life, I live and breathe "buyer beware," because I know companies and sellers pull a lot of underhanded stuff (my personal "favorite," if you've seen me elsewhere on AW, is companies quietly selling their customers out to direct marketers -- this is another form of underhandedness IMO).
Yes, there are plenty of honest sellers, and believe it or not, I go into a sales situation expecting things will go well, because I rather would trust the sellers and have a pleasant day, but I do definitely keep my eyes and ears open at all times, and have a great set of alarm bells that ring every time I sense hype, ambiguous wording, or pressure. These bells have saved me worse headaches, I'm sure.
Now if only I could produce more copies of those bells and sell them on eBay!
----
What's being done in the name of direct marketing nowadays is crazy.
The above are all just my opinions, except where I cite facts as such.
Oh, I am not dc9a320 anywhere except AW. Any others are not me.
Is eBay is changing from a world bazaar into a bizarre world?
posted on January 25, 2001 06:51:30 PM new
The reason, Rosie, people use fake email addresses is because they can be suspended for auction interference, even if there is nothing to gain by interfering with the auction. duh
[ edited by cmbtboots on Jan 25, 2001 06:52 PM ]
posted on January 25, 2001 07:10:06 PM new
cmbtboots ~ You may consider reading Meya's post.. and then my post might make sense to you. It's the one that starts out with "letter of the law" and "spirit of the law". Speaking of reading, did you realize that failure to file your tax return can be upgraded to a felony and the number one word they use is "FRAUD". It's amazing how much fraud and possible felonious activity can be found.. don't you agree? You know, when I think about it.. it's the exact same thing as that auction. Except maybe the auction doesn't fall within the felonious category.
sophie89~ You have failed to grasp the basic concept that there were OTHER MEASURES (re: legal, within the realm of ebay's rules) that you could take to shut these auctions down. So, no.. my mentality is not that of Nazi Germany.
I'm sorry, I have little tolerance for people that find excuses and reasons to break rules. If they do it in one place, they'll do it in another place...... and that will end up effecting me. I prefer the legal route. If you prefer the shortcut method.. that's fine. All I'm saying is that when something happens to you you have no room complain, cry , itch and moan. Don't complain if you get shut down by VERO. Don't complain that your auction got turned in for some minor little detail. Don't complain if someone emails YOUR bidders and says that you're potentially fraudulent... *either real or imagined*. What's good enough for you to do to others.. is good enough for others to do to you.
posted on January 25, 2001 07:15:19 PM new
I looked at this seller's other auctions yesterday before he got NARU'd.
He clearly knew what he was doing and by reading his other auction descriptions, you can plainly see that it was not a simple mistake and it was completely pre meditated.
He pulled a fast one and I hope he is punished for it, not just NARU'd by ebay.
However, if this were to go into court, I do not see a ruling against this seller.
Although it was very deliberate what he did, he did it very well.
The auction is "misleading" if you know the circumstances.
Let me ask you this, if there was not a neg in his feedback regarding this auction, who would have known ?
I see sellers on ebay that do 1 sentence auctions and they are not trying to scam anybody. How on earth can anyone monitor auctions like these ?
I think it would be completely impossible !
This seller covered his butt with his description. The auction is clearly for a box and reciept only. The seller can provide a hard copy of the auction to in court and show the link that says, "ask seller a question" and simply state that if anyone had a question as to if the auction was just for a box or what, they could have emailed him and asked.
I do NOT, in ANYWAY, condone what this seller did, but in the eyes of the law, he did nothing wrong.
Here is an example I thought I might throw out and see what you would think. Let's just say this auction had no pics, a scetchy descriptions, and started at .01 cent. What do you think the auction is for ?
