posted on April 17, 2001 10:01:36 AM
I'll answer my own question re-reading the paperwork from ebay it says that he has 14 days to obtain a court order preventing me from relisting.
If the reporting party disagrees with your Counter-Notice, they may file a legal action against you to prevent the re-listing of the ended item(s).
So I think I wlll fill out the VERO paperwork and see what happens as you say worst case I wind up where I am right now
posted on April 17, 2001 04:29:43 PM
The counter notice you send to eBay will clearly state that the rights holder will have to file suit in the offenders jurisdiction. In fact it asks you to fill in the Federal cout address in your jurisdiction.
posted on April 17, 2001 07:27:30 PMskip -- You go, guy! I'm proud of you standing up to this guy. From the description you provided, it sure sounds like he shouldn't otter get to do what he's done. I hope that's the case. Great news that it has to be in your jurisdiction! Keep us apprised.
P.S. I'm all for copyright and trademark and patent protection, but some of this stuff really does go over the top (or at least so it sounds).
posted on April 17, 2001 08:24:31 PM
In case anyone is interested, I did a search and found 1 patent with the words "can" and "clock" in the title. It wasn't called "clock on a can" as the vero reporter is supposed to have said. The title is simply "Can clock". The patent number is 397041 and the patent holder is Selco Custom Time Corp. of Tulsa, OK.
The images included with the patent application show the clock mechanism at the top of the can, not along its side (as in the vero seller's auctions), but I can't rule out that the design isn't sufficiently similar to be protected under the same copyright.
Here's a thought: If the vero seller doesn't file a claim in court to prevent your auction from being restored, and he isn't named on that patent application or living in Oklahoma, tell him that you are going to contact the Selco Custom Time Corp and report HIM for (possibly) violating THEIR patent.
[ edited by JSmith99 on Apr 17, 2001 08:25 PM ]
posted on April 18, 2001 05:39:39 AMlaum
"whether or not I can prevent someone else from creating the same phrase is of course up to a court of law."
Phrases and titles can't be copyrighted ... although they can be trademarked. The WHOLE ad, including the arrangement of the phrases, can fall into copyright territory if it is more than just a listing of facts (you gotta have either creative effort or compilation effort to warrant copyright protection). If someone duplicates a couple of your phrases, especially when describing a common item, it's not a violation of copyright law. If it were, advertising would be DEAD.
SKIP -
"In essance he says he owns the patent on can clocks. "
OK, he "owns the patent"? Just ask him for the number and do a search on it via the USA patent Office's online database. That will tell you the owner of the patent and what it is for. And I'm willing to bet it isn't for a clock made of a beer can.
"not a infrigment on his patent rights for me to sell a used item" Certainly NOT. Search the net for "first sale doctrine" wherein there are numerous Supreme Court decisions about the right of the owner of any lawfully made and purchased product to offer that item for resale AND to make images of it for the ads. He's blowing hot air and is wildly uninformed about his "rights".
If he files suit, is has to be in the FEDERAL COURT where YOU live. So it's local for you, not for him.
CleverGirl
"I could see where the scan could be considered a copyright violation of the CD cover."
If you are using it on a pirated CD, or a diferent CD, yes. But despite the copyright, you have the right to make the scan and use it for the sale of that CD as long as you are the legal owner of it. That is one of the exceptions in the copyright laws.
posted on April 18, 2001 10:23:07 AM
WOW thanks for all the intersting imput
J smith that patent search thing you did was pretty cool btw his item looks nothing like the one pictured in the patent.
abacxi: It seems to me that evan if he did hold a patent on this device the only way I could infrenge would be to manufacture a duplicte item
This is what I stated to him in the first 7 e-mails that he ignored.
as to asking him for a patent number I don't intend to cumminicate with him further
My last e-mail to him sunday I told him I was going to contact ebay and relist
His replay "PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU NOINGLY SELL AN ITEM THAT IS PROTECTED WETHER IT IS NEW OR OLD IS AN INFRINGEMENT WITHIN THE U.S PATENT LAWS.YOU DO WHAT YOU FEEL YOU HAVE TO DO AND I WILL DO THE SAME"
I filled out the VERO paperwork but my fax deceided to die today It's in the trash and I am heading out this afternoon to find another.
I did email ebay and asked how to complain about fruad by a VERO member and received a boilerplate explanation of VERO in response I re-emailed VERO and have received no response as of this posting. As I told vero in my last email there does not seem to be anything in place to hold vero members responsible for fraudulant fillings.
I do appreciate all posts and I don't mean to slight anyone by not addressing their response particularily.
