posted on September 20, 2000 01:05:57 PM new
I just had an interesting phone call from Shawn at eBay re the Waverly VeRO issues. (I had one Waverly auction stopped 2 weeks ago, then a big batch of them stopped last week...and a form email from Waverly in reply.) I just wondered if anyone else here has had similar calls...he told me he is calling all Waverly sellers who have had their auctions stopped and informing the eBay legal dept. of the issue. I did tell him that mine was illegally stopped as I was selling items made from Waverly fabric which was legally purchased...and advised him to read the extensive AuctionWatch threads on this subject...which he hadn't done yet.
posted on September 20, 2000 02:12:26 PM new
I had an auction ended by ebay last week too because of the Waverly VeRO issue. I also recieved a form letter reply from them but still did not understand what I did wrong. I bought my curtains from a local bed and bath store and they are made from Waverly Fabric and I just ended up not using them and couldn't return them because I didn't have my receipt. No one has called me about it though. Can I relist them without using the word Waverly and without using the picture of the insert from the package? I know they will not sell as high this way (they were up to $31.00 with 4 days left when canceled)but I just don't have any use for them. Will I get in any trouble with ebay?
posted on September 20, 2000 02:57:04 PM new
SUSIEGIRL -
Reposting this from a way earlier thread:
LOOK AT THIS LINK for the defense against the "it's our copyrighted widget and you can't make pictures of it for your ads" VERO action ...
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/92chap1.html#107 states quite clearly:
"In the case of a work lawfully reproduced in useful articles that have been offered for sale or other distribution to the public, copyright does not include any right to prevent the making, distribution, or display of pictures or photographs of such articles in connection with advertisements or commentaries related to the distribution or display of such articles, or in connection with news reports."
And QUOTE FROM ANOTHER THREAD
"The law contains a long-honored principle called the "First Sale Doctrine". This doctrine, which addresses the exact question that you raise, says that no restrictions whatsoever can be imposed on the right to resell merchandise by the first seller of that merchandise. Thus [/b]if a manufacturer sells goods, it cannot absent one of the few vary narrow exceptions there are to the First Sale Doctrine, impose any restriction on the right of the purchaser of those goods to resell them, or on the terms of any such resale." [/b] (the exceptions would be if it sold to a distributor who had a contract with the mfr.)
SUPREME COURT DECISION ON THIS AT:
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/headlines/content/1998040801.html
"The first sale doctrine states that once a copyright owner sells a copy of his work to another, the copyright owner relinquishes all further rights to sell or otherwise dispose of that copy . The Supreme Court first adopted the first sale doctrine in the case of Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus, 210 U.S. 339 (1908)."
From the summary: "The whole point of the first sale doctrine is that once the copyright owner places a copyrighted item in the stream of commerce by selling it, he has exhausted his exclusive statutory right to control its distribution".
.... and from the text of the decision: "After the first sale of a copyrighted item “lawfully made under this title,” any subsequent purchaser, whether from a domestic or from a foreign reseller, is obviously an “owner” of that item. Read literally, §109(a) unambiguously states that such an owner “is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell” that item."
... Tah DAH!
You bought it "in the stream of commerce" (sometimes waaaaaaaay downstream from the place it first hit the water), and if you are not a licensee or agent of theirs, they lost ALL CONTROL after the first sale.
You do NOT have the right to make more of the things, but you do have the right to resell them AND to make a photograph of them for your ads, regardless of the copyright, trademark, etc. status of the item. As long as it's legit, it's salable!
posted on September 21, 2000 11:08:33 AM new
I haven't heard from Shawn yet - they must be working backwards through the alphabet in your case, or I got missed by the Esses. I have spoken (recently) to Lizzie, then Jason. Lizzie tried to be helpful in a very pleasant way, then the next day, I got the call from Jason.
I tried to explain the problem to Jason. I told him that in spite of my notifications to eBay, in spite of notification to some sellers by lawyers representing the copyright owners warning them to cease and desist (one seller actually posted an entire letter from Warner Brothers lawyers in a phoney auction before it got pulled!), in spite of what the eBay lawyers themselves have said, and in spite of what is written on the eBay rules and regulations page (Jason read from that page as we talked), eBay STILL continues to allow over 300 illegal auctions for copyrighted materials to be listed and sold on their venue.
Jason responded by telling me about how eBay is now bigger than New York, how eBay gets 30,000 new members every day, and how eBay currently has 5 million items listed on their site.
When I was finally able to 'corner' him about 'the issue', he told me I was wrong, the copyright owners were wrong, the eBay lawyers were wrong, and that he was going to change the written eBay rules regarding these items!! All this just so eBay can allow their power sellers to continue marketing illegal items.
So, even a voice communication (or several) with eBay is frustrating and gets you nowhere.
But, I continue with my quest. I now have more than enough evidence (including the letter from the lawyers) that eBay is KNOWINGLY allowing SOME of their members (the biggies, not us onesy/twosey sellers that get NARU'd when we try to sell something similar) to sell ILLEGAL items on their site. I wonder how many more eBay people will need to get involved in this before they realize that when the hammer comes down, they are ALL just as guilty as the sellers, and they will all end up in the same place
