"What happens if a buyer believes an item is not authentic?
When buyers file a claim alleging that the item is not authentic, we require the buyer to destroy the item. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, we will reimburse the buyer or provide an eBay coupon."
Further, in "Your User Agreement" the following appears -
"Obligations with respect to allegedly non-authentic items:
For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, buyers are required to destroy an item if they claim it is not authentic. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, eBay will reimburse the buyer."
And, within "Your User Agreement" is a disclaimer, which in part states -
"You will not hold eBay responsible for other users' content, actions or inactions, items they list or their destruction of allegedly fake items. You acknowledge that we are not a traditional auctioneer. Instead, the sites are a venue to allow anyone to offer, sell, and buy just about anything, at anytime, from anywhere, in a variety of pricing formats and locations, such as stores, fixed price formats and auction-style formats."
Why is this important? In typical eBay speak, the statement does not address just who is responsible for determining that an item is counterfeit. Is a third party determination necessary? Or, will a claim by the buyer be sufficient for a counterfeit claim, and item destruction?
Trust me, this is a potential problem for all sellers. Especially since continued use of eBay to sell your products is considered as agreement to the terms. Terms which address the buyer's required action, but do not address the protection, if any, afforded the seller.
posted on May 8, 2009 06:00:56 PM new
This is Ebay self inflicted wound-allowing anyone,everyone to sell anything,everything,
now we have another rule ,call it rule number 13001
*
Economic Reform act of Chairman Obama of the socialist States of America :
10 ounces of meat per month,half a yard of cotton per year per adult.
Hellilujah!
[ edited by hwahwa on May 8, 2009 08:03 PM ]
posted on May 9, 2009 12:35:20 PM new
About 6 months ago I sold a Pele soccer jersey by Nike. 46 days went by and suddenly I get an email from the bidder claiming the jersey was a fake. I emailed him and explained that I purchased it from the Nike store here in Portland. I still offered to accept the return on it. Next the bidder reported me to ebay claiming that I sold a fake Nike jersey. The next time I listed all of my items, anything with the word Nike was blocked from being listed. I called up eBay and of course, nobody could give me any info other than "eBay can do what they want". So, for another 45 days this claim sat there on my account. The bidder never contacted me again, never returned the jersey, nothing. When the claim expired, I contacted ebay and asked them if they would suspend the user for making fraudulent claims... the ebay rep agreed, but said there isn't much they can do.
To make a long story short... you will always be at the mercy of the hand that feeds you unless you figure out a way to break that chain. You can sell through your own website, you can refuse to use Paypal, but in the end, it doesn't really matter. The contracts you sign with companies to process your payments, host your website, etc. has the power... and you have to go along with whatever they say unless you want to take them to court. This is the age of the new corporate way. They have more rights than people do.
posted on May 27, 2009 09:12:08 AM new
This just in from Kovels newsletter:
News, News, News
EBAY TRIES YET AGAIN
Ebay has again rewritten its policy on counterfeits in its Purchase Protection Policy. AuctionBytes.com interviewed John Pluhowski, an eBay spokesperson, to get clarity. The word "non-authentic" has been changed to "counterfeit" because it refers to illegal items prohibited on eBay (like fake Rolex watches, we assume). It does not include pieces described as "authentic Chippendale," evidently because Chippendale is not a trademarked brand. We are still confused. Are only modern brands with intellectual property rights, like Coca-Cola or Chanel, protected by the new policy? And are antique pieces described, for instance, as "Schimmel" folk carvings or "Ohr" pottery protected instead by eBay's "item not as described" policy? In the second case, if eBay has to settle the dispute, the seller could be in trouble.
