View Full Version : Will eBay be forced to block French buyers.
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 05:06
http://legalpad.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/07/09/ebay-scrambles-to-reverse-loss-in-lvmh-case/
The recent rulings in France regarding sales of products which are not authorized to be sold online, and the fact that there is unlikely to be a settlement leaves eBay in the position that it may have to "officially" end sales in France, meaning no French site.
This would mean blocking of French IP addresses, and blocking of Paypal use in France.
Seems a sad possibility for our French RFF members? But eBay may have no choice.
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 05:14
I just checked it, worked for me... maybe down in europe? It is fortune magazine.
legalpad.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/07/09/ebay-scrambles-to-reverse-loss-in-lvmh-case/
Michael I.
07-10-2008, 05:18
Also,ebay will be known as freedom bay :)
M. Valdemar
07-10-2008, 05:19
I think eBay has long stopped being a "venue" and they should be getting a big comeuppance soon from several quarters.
Somebody really needs to stick it to them good at this point.
Sounds like the old 'killing the messenger' for a bad message. It's not eBay's fault if people are misrepresenting products. The should go after the sellers, not the 'store'. IMHO :cool:
There have been occasional outbursts of grumbling in the USA about bogus/phony/fake goods on eBay (and maybe even a lawsuit or two) but nothing so far on the scale of the LV case.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
Perhaps a franceBaie will evolve to pick up the slack if eBay exits...
Tough luck. Do business in a country, abide by the laws of said country.
If they want to retreat from everywhere their "venue" argument fails, they may find themselves without a customer base at some point.
There are two elements in this trial :
1) Ebay sold counterfeited items acknowledgely and did not take sufficient actions to remedy it.
2) Ebay sells original items outside of the certified dealer channels.
In both cases, it is not legal under French legislation that is why the got hammered by the fine. It looks like Ebay has taken actions against point 1) but refuses to comply with 2) arguing that they are doing that for the good of customers. Maybe, but laws are laws and Ebay does not define by itself what is good for customers, legislation does. They are going down a very dangerous route here and I am sure other countries will soon follow.
Gabriel M.A.
07-10-2008, 05:48
Sounds like the old 'killing the messenger' for a bad message. It's not eBay's fault if people are misrepresenting products. The should go after the sellers, not the 'store'. IMHO :cool:
That was one of the points of the lawsuit: eBay should be responsible who and what they let sell and buy on their site.
Same thing happened with Nazi-era "memorabilia". Or child pornography. Prescription knock-offs. Illegal products should be stopped at the gates by the gate-keeper.
At least common sense says so. But rampant capitalism is often at odds with common sense. Just like rampant communism.
I've heard there are US manufacturers waiting to see what happened with the LV lawsuit, with their own lawyers waiting to go. I hope so.
My experience, professionally and personally, is eBay doesn't give a damn if counterfeits are sold, they get their commission anyway. I've seen the same sellers purveying dodgy goods again and again - and innocent people get fooled. I'm not suggesting LVMH are acting out of selfless motives, but eBay have had this coming for a long time.
Sounds like the old 'killing the messenger' for a bad message. It's not eBay's fault if people are misrepresenting products. The should go after the sellers, not the 'store'. IMHO :cool:
So if you are a phone reseller and someone comes to you with a bunch of brand new Iphone at a very special price, you must always take for granted that he is saying the true and this is not either stolen or counterfeit items ? No, some due diligence is needed.
This is exactly the responsibility that Ebay is trying to get away from.
How does it apply to second hand original items sold by individuals (who will never be certified dealers)? If it does, I'm not sure how can anyone make sure seller is not selling fake goods - it's virtual store.
NickTrop
07-10-2008, 07:02
I never sold anything on eBay. However, "reasonable care" might be as simple as having the seller complete a waiver that states that to the best of their knowledge (or even, perhaps, if they "don't" have knowledge) the goods they are selling are not counterfeit or stolen items and that the seller assumes all responsibility and legal action if they are knowingly (or unknowingly) selling illegal merchandise.
Perhaps they have such a waiver but in my mind that should cover it. I don't think it would be possible for eBay to insure that all the merchandise isn't counterfeit and to expect eBay to do this would be unreasonable.
EDIT: And - in fact, eBay should/should have proactively gone after such sellers via a nice fat lawsuit and publicize it before other countries sue them.
As it stands now, to me, eBay is doing little to deter such transactions or to self-police on its own site. They seem to be negligent to their own business in this regard. Counterfeit items are pretty well-known. Gucci, Coach, usually apparel, watches, art, etc. and certain electronics (and a particular camera manufacturer). Despite the number of items at auction, some monitoring of suspicious transactions and sellers of "high incidence" counterfeit items might not be as difficult as it appears at first blush. A "sample" system where a statistically valid sample of suspicious items are flagged or a honey pot is set up where eBay itself bids on an item (rigs the bid) and inspects it for authenticity might be one solution if they're not doing this already.
xayraa33
07-10-2008, 07:22
How about Germany being out of the bay family?
with all those Ukrainian fake Leica sales on the bay.
1) Ebay sold counterfeited items acknowledgely and did not take sufficient actions to remedy it.
2) Ebay sells original items outside of the certified dealer channels
It's probably worth pointing out that eBay doesn't sell anything - it's eBay sellers who are doing the above.
That's total BS. In fact, eBay isn't selling anything. By time manufacturers of stupid overpriced things like LV is, will have to adopt to reality like music industry does.
Planet is changing, internet does it - so it's totally wrong reaction to internet. By the way, in our market one can go and buy totally fake LV bag for miserable money from originals price. Everyone knows it, and watching girls in bus with fake LV bags and smelling by fake "luxury" fragrance I smile because it's what they need to feel good, as cheap 30-40 years camera is what makes me feeling good. We have spent similar sum on our enjoyments and we feel good. They know they are buying FAKE, they know it.
Funniest thing is that when corps will withdraw fake goods from markets and internet - do yopu think that those poor womans will go for genuine products ? No, you dumb corps !
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 08:02
There are two elements in this trial :
1) Ebay sold counterfeited items acknowledgely and did not take sufficient actions to remedy it.
2) Ebay sells original items outside of the certified dealer channels.
In both cases, it is not legal under French legislation that is why the got hammered by the fine. It looks like Ebay has taken actions against point 1) but refuses to comply with 2) arguing that they are doing that for the good of customers. Maybe, but laws are laws and Ebay does not define by itself what is good for customers, legislation does. They are going down a very dangerous route here and I am sure other countries will soon follow.
The problem is that point 2 is against US law and eBay is in the US. While companies can have authorized dealers, in the US you may sell whatever products you wish. When US and French law are at odds, the US law must prevail.
Of course companies like eBay and Microsoft must then decide if the French market is large enough to set up special companies, but so far the French courts seem to not recognize eBay's right to do business outside of eBay France, they are simply (like many courts in the US) unwilling to understand that the internet has no borders.
Just as eBay france or Yahoo Japan are special to that country, they can be accessed outside of that country, and there is little that anyone can do about it.
tbarker13
07-10-2008, 08:27
I'm not so sure that the laws of individual countries should apply to the Internet.
If a country is unhappy with the way a particular site does business with the world, then that country should just take the extraordinary step of blocking all of its citizens from accessing the site.
I wonder about this too. We all pay Mr. Gandy to list items on this site. Is he responsible for verifying the authenticity of items sold here?
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 08:35
From the above link, ebay has an international subsidiary in europe :
"eBay’s headquarters in San Jose, California, and its international subsidiary in Berne, Switzerland."
So european law will apply.
Ebay is willing to apply European law to its Euro sites, that has never been in dispute, they are willing to make www.ebay.fr comply fully.
What they are not able to do is break US law by making www.ebay.com (the US site) into a French law-based site. In the US we do not have branding or so called "fair trade" laws, they were all struck down in the 80s as being unconstitutional.
You cannot restrict what a store sells in the US, you can stop counterfeiting, but you cannot tell a store not to offer legitimate goods, in the so called "gray market." In many states if it is a first sale (the goods were purchased from an authorized wholesale source) the company may also have to honor all warranties.
Stores like B&H photo could not sell in France.
From the above link, ebay has an international subsidiary in europe :
"eBay’s headquarters in San Jose, California, and its international subsidiary in Berne, Switzerland."
So european law will apply.
Switzerland is not part of the EU, so communitary laws do not apply there. Probably why they did it on top of fiscal reasons.
Yes but ebay are taking their cut.
They gain financially from each sale.
Yes, but as this is a legal issue I thought it best to be precise - nobody is charging them with actually selling anything illegally. A key part of the case seems to be about whether they act as merely a "host", or as a "broker". This seems to be the relevant part (from that Fortune link)...
"On the merits, eBay has been arguing that the French courts lack jursidiction to impose that country’s unusually restrictive commercial regulations on worldwide e-commerce. In addition, it contends that, even under French law, eBay is not responsible for the transgressions of its users because it is a mere passive provider of Internet “host” services. Such services, according to a French statute and European Community policy, are not generally considered responsible for the transgressions of their users.
The Commercial Court of Paris rejected both contentions, finding that eBay’s sites were subject to French law because they were accessible from France, and that eBay’s very active role in facilitating sales, together with the fact that it takes a commission on every sale, make it an active “broker” rather than a mere passive “host.” (Earlier in June, a different lower French court, sitting in Troyes (southeast of Paris) similarly found, in a case brought by Hermès International against eBay, that eBay was not a mere “host,” but a “publisher,” actively involved in creating content and, therefore, responsible for what was being advertised and sold there.)"
Personally I'd agree that they are acting as a broker.
As to the merits of the case itself, I'm split.
I'm with LVMH that eBay doesn't do anywhere near enough to combat sales of counterfeit items - I've seen many DVDs being openly sold as pirate copies on eBay UK, for example (and when I bought an allegedly legit one that turned out to be a fake, eBay just said to send it back for a refund - they weren't at all interested in stopping the seller).
But as for the "unoffical dealer" bit, I think that's an odious part of French law and and I'm on eBay's side - anyone should be able to sell anything they legally own (and provided it's otherwise legal to resell) without the previous owner having any say in the matter.
The problem is that point 2 is against US law and eBay is in the US. While companies can have authorized dealers, in the US you may sell whatever products you wish. When US and French law are at odds, the US law must prevail.
Of course companies like eBay and Microsoft must then decide if the French market is large enough to set up special companies, but so far the French courts seem to not recognize eBay's right to do business outside of eBay France, they are simply (like many courts in the US) unwilling to understand that the internet has no borders.
Just as eBay france or Yahoo Japan are special to that country, they can be accessed outside of that country, and there is little that anyone can do about it.
You have some good points yet there is a way around that for Ebay :
- do not allow the option to ship to France the products that are being disputed. That is pretty easy I think technically.
Also, it is not a crusade against Ebay as it is generally perceived as huge value savings for the customers and a great trade mean even by French authorities. Yet, some laws must be respected, especially if companies with their headquarters in France decide to protect their interest in France. The fine was taking into account lost business for these companies.
In the end, Ebay is taking a hard stance on that because it is a breach that they do not want other countries to get in. It is a danger to part of their revenues.
As for the no boundaries of the internet ... try to set up a business and sell in France (or Germany) without VAT ... won't be long until you get detected and get the customs knocking on your customers doors ...
But as for the "unoffical dealer" bit, I think that's an odious part of French law and and I'm on eBay's side - anyone should be able to sell anything they legally own (and provided it's otherwise legal to resell) without the previous owner having any say in the matter.
So the NBA, NFL and MLB are cleary acting illegally according to this criteria, right ? :D
So the NBA, NFL and MLB are cleary acting illegally according to this criteria, right ?
What on earth are they?
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 09:34
So the NBA, NFL and MLB are cleary acting illegally according to this criteria, right ? :D
Not following you there, but if you mean is ticket scalping (resale of tickets at a higher price) legal in the US, it is still in the courts.
Restriction of the resale of legitimate goods is basically NOT allowed. You own it, you can sell it, as long as it is not counterfeit.
Not following you there, but if you mean is ticket scalping (resale of tickets at a higher price) legal in the US, it is still in the courts.
Ah, we're talking of tickets for sporting events.
I think there is be a significant difference there (and I'm talking morally here, about what I think should be legal, not what I think actually is legal).
When you buy a ticket for an event, it is not the ticket (the piece of paper) that you are actually buying - what you are doing is entering into a contractual agreement in which you pay up front and the sports organisation in turn agrees to provide you with a sporting entertainment service at a future date. And I think there is certainly some moral ground for them to claim that their contract is only with you, the person they entered into the agreement with, and the contract can not be sold on to a third party. So I think a seller of a service should have some rights over who they wish to provide that service to. (Though I'd expect any relevant contractual law to be quite tricky).
Selling goods is another matter altogether, and I don't think there is any moral justification for a seller of goods to try to restrict what a buyer can subsequently do with them (and I'm pleased to hear that US law follows that line).
Not following you there, but if you mean is ticket scalping (resale of tickets at a higher price) legal in the US, it is still in the courts.
Restriction of the resale of legitimate goods is basically NOT allowed. You own it, you can sell it, as long as it is not counterfeit.
Sorry, this was not clear. I meant the franchises as it seems that an owner cannot sell its team without consent of the other owners. But the tickets example is a good one I did not think of.
jan normandale
07-10-2008, 10:31
Anyone who has ever dealt with eb@y knows they are a law unto themselves. They do as they please in the US and don't listen to anyone but themselves. It's a strange corporate culture that has come to a logical conclusion.
One bridge too far. Now they are saying they'll just 'take their ball and play elsewhere'. I think there is a stormcloud on their horizon from France, the US and the many retailers who are following this decision.
shimo-kitasnap
07-10-2008, 10:42
so much for free trade, guess the backward socialist french gov't doesn't believe in consumers being able to buy the best quality products for the best possible prices.
sorry for sounding rude, but I like capitalism, globalization and freedom to buy and sell to whomever I want.
shimo-kitasnap
07-10-2008, 10:45
E-bay should pick up and leave them in the dust, consumers will complain, and maybe they'll think twice and allow e-bay to come back.
so much for free trade, guess the backward socialist french gov't doesn't believe in consumers being able to buy the best quality products for the best possible prices.
sorry for sounding rude, but I like capitalism, globalization and freedom to buy and sell to whomever I want.
Sorry to disappoint you, but the socialists are not governing in France for a long time (7 years at least). President Sarkozy is a pure free trade/liberalism advocate.
Quality is also about service. Usually low prices mean low service.
jan normandale
07-10-2008, 10:48
so much for free trade, guess the backward socialist french gov't doesn't believe in consumers being able to buy the best quality products for the best possible prices.
sorry for sounding rude, but I like capitalism, globalization and freedom to buy and sell to whomever I want.
this is about a legal issue not capitalism or socialism both of which suck on any given day, and yeah if you think it sounds rude then you know it is.
this is about a legal issue not capitalism or socialism both of which suck on any given day, and yeah if you think it sounds rude then you know it is.
He also probably likes children working in factories, 50 cents a day salaries and people working in mining unprotected.
Capitalism is probably the least worse economic system, but let's not chant its glory, because there are also many bad aspects to it.
Sorry for sounding rude ... ;)
Last actual socialist prime ministers in France (were called the council presidents at that time) were Léon Blum (1936-1937) and Pierre Mendès-France (1954-1955).
Not aware of genuine socialists having come to power in France since...
:rolleyes:
Depends on your defintion of socialism. last one for me was Lionel Jospin in the 90's though I agree that he acted more as a right wing member :rolleyes:
rogue_designer
07-10-2008, 11:33
I'm wondering how ebay would check to know whether a given product was legitimate. Automatically prevent certain products from being available as a preventive measure? What about someone who has a legitimate product - how do they prove to ebay that's is cleared to sell?
Too many enforcement problems. Ebay never touches the actual product - even if they did spot checks, they could be given a real one, while the vendor ships out fakes.. etc.
They facilitate as a communication tool, but are not a vendor.
I agree that they should be more proactive in removing sellers who have been proven to be selling fakes. But beyond that, what could they reasonably be expected to do?
nikonhswebmaster
07-10-2008, 12:03
I'm wondering how ebay would check to know whether a given product was legitimate. Automatically prevent certain products from being available as a preventive measure? What about someone who has a legitimate product - how do they prove to ebay that's is cleared to sell?
Too many enforcement problems. Ebay never touches the actual product - even if they did spot checks, they could be given a real one, while the vendor ships out fakes.. etc.
They facilitate as a communication tool, but are not a vendor.
I agree that they should be more proactive in removing sellers who have been proven to be selling fakes. But beyond that, what could they reasonably be expected to do?
In their trouble in France, the company simply says that there can be NO sales new, used or otherwise on eBay. It is ridiculous.
You pay your money and take your chances. An informed buyer using ebay, should have very few, if any, problems. If you know what you are looking for, ebay is one of the best places to find a deal on many items. As place to unload phoney, counterfiet items, well, you should be able toidentify these items before you purchase them. Some people don't care. As the saying goes. "If it looks too good be true, it probably is."
eBay sells nothing.
eBay rents space on the internet for people to sell
eBay should have originally disavowed any type of security
eBay should have originally put the responsibility for security where it belongs... on the seller and buyers.
If I go downtown and rent store space and hook up the utilities to begin a business enterprise.... And furthermore... If I misrepresent the products I sell.... Can the buyers sue and collect from my Landlord and the utilities providers.
eBays only... and largest.... error was in incorporating elements like Safe Harbor and attempts to protect buyers and sellers from each other.
I have always entered into every one of the 500 transactions I have had on eBay as if there is NO... NONE.... NADA protection from the system. Anyone who expects otherwise has a fool for a lawyer... or something to that effect.
Now, granted, eBay may not have grown under this format and be nearly as big as it is today, but I think it is entirely unreasonable for buyers and sellers to blame eBay for actions which are the sole responsibility of those buyers/sellers.
And also. I teach eBay classes in community college community ed classes... and that last paragraph is strongly incorporated into my lesson plan.
dazedgonebye
07-10-2008, 12:47
eBay sells nothing.
eBay rents space on the internet for people to sell
eBay should have originally disavowed any type of security
eBay should have originally put the responsibility for security where it belongs... on the seller and buyers.
If I go downtown and rent store space and hook up the utilities to begin a business enterprise.... And furthermore... If I misrepresent the products I sell.... Can the buyers sue and collect from my Landlord and the utilities providers.
Now, granted, eBay may not have grown under this format and be nearly as big as it is today, but I think it is entirely unreasonable for buyers and sellers to blame eBay for actions which are the sole responsibility of those buyers/sellers.
If your landlord set up the rules for your transactions and gets a cut from each one, I'd say he looks a lot more like a broker than a landlord.
Faintandfuzzy
07-10-2008, 12:54
I’ve had more problems with buyers in the USA than every other country put together that I’ve sold to or purchased from. The most annoying thing is the habit of US sellers putting “US only” for who can purchase the item. These same sellers have no problems purchasing from all over the world.
I once purchase a hockey card for my son from a seller in the USA. The response back that I got after he cancelled my PayPal payment was “what part of US only” didn’t I get? I said I thought it was an error as he had just made a purchase from a seller in Japan. He never responded back.
NickTrop
07-10-2008, 13:22
so much for free trade, guess the backward socialist french gov't doesn't believe in consumers being able to buy the best quality products for the best possible prices.
sorry for sounding rude, but I like capitalism, globalization and freedom to buy and sell to whomever I want.
LOL - enter the AM radio political talk listenin', "socialist" accusin', French bashin', "conservative". eBay is being used as a vehicle for selling counterfeit goods. They've not taken reasonable precautions to protect legit manufacturers - and are clearly abbetting and aiding the law breakers. Period. The French courts are protecting "free trade" and "capitalism" by protecting the legitimate manufacturers from the harm being caused to their legit business by counterfeiters selling millions of dollars worth of counterfeit goods on eBay. Had eBay taken "reasonable precautions" against this sort of thing, there would be no issue.
I'm with the French courts on this one. I don't see how you couldn't be.
dazedgonebye
07-10-2008, 13:34
LOL - enter the AM radio political talk listenin', "socialist" accusin', French bashin', "conservative". eBay is being used as a vehicle for selling counterfeit goods. They've not taken reasonable precautions to protect legit manufacturers - and are clearly abbetting and aiding the law breakers. Period. The French courts are protecting "free trade" and "capitalism" by protecting the legitimate manufacturers from the harm being caused to their legit business by counterfeiters selling millions of dollars worth of counterfeit goods on eBay. Had eBay taken "reasonable precautions" against this sort of thing, there would be no issue.
I'm with the French courts on this one. I don't see how you couldn't be.
I'm with them over the fraud/counterfeit issues.
I'm on the other side over the idea of being an authorized seller. If I'm not authorized to sell it, that's alot like I don't actually own it.
"the fact that there is unlikely to be a settlement leaves eBay in the position that it may have to "officially" end sales in France, meaning no French site. This would mean blocking of French IP addresses, and blocking of Paypal use in France."
While possible, I think we're a long way from that. I'm sure eBay has several options to explore before it gets to something that drastic. While eBay says it's technically impossible, what they really mean is that it's technically expensive.
For me, 4 things stand out:
1) Is eBay a host or facilitator? As ruled by some courts, eBay seems to be a facilitator, and would thus be responsible for content. This was the same question faced by AT&T when broadband first became a buzzword, when they made a conscious decision to be a "transport only" company so as not to be legally liable for the content. If eBay somehow changed policy or how they do business to qualify for "transport/host only" status, what then?
2) Does blocking such e-commerce channels constrain the consumer's freedom or does a company's right to choose its own channels prevail? That's an interesting legal question.
3) Another equally interesting point is the role that the EU will eventually take in all this.
4) If it does get to the point where eBay blocks accessibility to all of their sites from all French origination points, how would the typical French consumer react?
rogue_designer
07-10-2008, 14:06
I’ve had more problems with buyers in the USA than every other country put together that I’ve sold to or purchased from. The most annoying thing is the habit of US sellers putting “US only” for who can purchase the item. These same sellers have no problems purchasing from all over the world.
I once purchase a hockey card for my son from a seller in the USA. The response back that I got after he cancelled my PayPal payment was “what part of US only” didn’t I get? I said I thought it was an error as he had just made a purchase from a seller in Japan. He never responded back.
Unfortunately - many US seller have no idea or don't want to deal with shipping internationally. The system here doesn't make it easy - several postal employees I've talked to couldn't tell me what form I needed, much less effectively calculate postage - and many European countries add on tremendous taxes (VAT) which can complicate the matter on both sides.
and some US Only sellers have simply had bad experiences. Try collecting an insurance claim on a camera insured by USPS and handled by them, US Customs, UK Customs, Royal Mail and allegedly arriving damaged. I ended up with a $500 paperweight. I do make exceptions to US Only, but only by request. Any other foreign bid is simply cancelled and no explanation is needed.
How about Germany being out of the bay family?
with all those Ukrainian fake Leica sales on the bay.
In fact there is somewhat of a precedent in the sale of Nazi paraphernalia, which is heavily regulated under German law. When viewing such an auction from a German IP address or while logged in with a German account, eBay shows a message that the sale of this item is prohibited in and to Germany. eBay is not making much of much of a fuss about it, as Germany is a fairly important market for eBay that they can't afford to lose.
I guess they could simply do the same thing for the French as well. For the time being, however, eBay instead opts to whining and threatening. Tomorrow they will probably quietly start checking auctions and filtering them instead.
In response to all those USians complaining about socialist France and its evil impediment to trade - you could probably find some things that are illegal for unregulated sale in the US, such as narcotics, prescription medications, heavy weapons etc., wonder why eBay isn't selling them, and then whine about the socialist order of things where the free exchange of goods is being trampled down. Essentially it's the same thing really. We live in a regulated world, some barriers to trade are in existence everywhere. Laws that are particular to each country, and if you want to have a business presence there you'll have to obey.
Philipp
In fact there is somewhat of a precedent in the sale of Nazi paraphernalia, which is heavily regulated under German law. When viewing such an auction from a German IP address or while logged in with a German account, eBay shows a message that the sale of this item is prohibited in and to Germany. eBay is not making much of much of a fuss about it, as Germany is a fairly important market for eBay that they can't afford to lose.
I guess they could simply do the same thing for the French as well. For the time being, however, eBay instead opts to whining and threatening. Tomorrow they will probably quietly start checking auctions and filtering them instead.
In response to all those USians complaining about socialist France and its evil impediment to trade - you could probably find some things that are illegal for unregulated sale in the US, such as narcotics, prescription medications, heavy weapons etc., wonder why eBay isn't selling them, and then whine about the socialist order of things where the free exchange of goods is being trampled down. Essentially it's the same thing really. We live in a regulated world, some barriers to trade are in existence everywhere. Laws that are particular to each country, and if you want to have a business presence there you'll have to obey.
Philipp
Could not have said it better.
I would add that it is pretty easy to write algorythms for a company like Ebay that would spot 99% of potential counterfeited items or the ones where manufucturers have given priority to certified dealers. It is now just about whether Ebay will comply with the laws or not.
David Murphy
07-11-2008, 01:40
I am not a big fan of eBay, but this is a rare instance of in which I will side with them. It is the dream of all manufacturers to completely lock down the distribution of their goods by making "unauthorized sales" illegal. There are past and continuing attempts to do this in the US as well, most recently using the US Customs Department to prohibit the importation of so-called trade-marked items without the trade-mark holders permission (even if legally owned by the importer). This is really a form of mercantilism, not capitalism, and certainly not socialism. Mercantilism by one Googled definition is:
"an economic system in which government (the invisible foot) determines the what, how, and for whom decisions (are made) by doling out the rights to undertake certain economic decisions."
It runs quite counter to the idea that one can own something, i.e. truly possess personal property and is, in my opinion, an egregious assault on personal freedom and liberty.
However, all that said, I believe of course the French should be able to organize any economic system they like and of course eBay must play by those rules while operating in France. Those are the facts if they want to be global - they have to adapt to the country they operate in and not expect the reverse. If they cannot or will not they should leave.
The continuing struggle multinational corporations to control the sale and resale of their products (and thus dominate their markets) is a consequence of globalism. One reason companies try to control the distribution in all ways is to set different prices for goods in different countries - sometimes radically different prices. Pharmaceuticals are a good example. It is ILLEGAL to import legally purchased medicines from Canada into the US, even for personal use. This is "for our own safety". It is due to a law passed by Congress at the behest of drug corporations to monopolize distribution.
These gangster drug corporations want the benefits of free trade and global markets only when it suits them, but want these benefits stifled when it forces them compete or threatens their interests.
dazedgonebye
07-11-2008, 06:26
In fact there is somewhat of a precedent in the sale of Nazi paraphernalia, which is heavily regulated under German law. When viewing such an auction from a German IP address or while logged in with a German account, eBay shows a message that the sale of this item is prohibited in and to Germany. eBay is not making much of much of a fuss about it, as Germany is a fairly important market for eBay that they can't afford to lose.
I guess they could simply do the same thing for the French as well. For the time being, however, eBay instead opts to whining and threatening. Tomorrow they will probably quietly start checking auctions and filtering them instead.
In response to all those USians complaining about socialist France and its evil impediment to trade - you could probably find some things that are illegal for unregulated sale in the US, such as narcotics, prescription medications, heavy weapons etc., wonder why eBay isn't selling them, and then whine about the socialist order of things where the free exchange of goods is being trampled down. Essentially it's the same thing really. We live in a regulated world, some barriers to trade are in existence everywhere. Laws that are particular to each country, and if you want to have a business presence there you'll have to obey.
Philipp
I thought the socialist thing was out of line, and more importantly besides the point.
However, you haven't drawn any kind of real parallel here. No one said you should be able to buy and sell things that are illegal to own.
Preventing me from selling something I legally own is very nearly the same thing as taking that thing from me. I don't own it if I can't keep it or sell it at my discretion. Such a thing is contrary to the idea of property rights that are a fundamental part of the freedoms we are fond of over here. Not that the goobernment hasn't tried to do us out of rights like that in the past. Not that they won't again. Money talks.
All that being said, of course Ebay must play by French rules if it wishes to operate in France. We would not tollerate a company based in some country with no fraud laws to operate in the US and say, "Well, that's legal where I come from."
BTW, I don't know any "USians." Perhaps you have a less offensive definition of that term than I find looking in the urban dictionary http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=USian. For the sake of civility, I would hope you do.
seems fair to me. If they were knowingly selling stolen goods, I wouldn't be any more or less sympathetic. If they want to be a business, they have to abide by the laws where they operate.
And IMHO, "the internet" is no more nebulous than the mail or telephone systems. I see no reason the same rules shouldn't apply. If it is illegal to sell certian goods over the phone or by mail in France, it is illegal to do so via email or websites. US attorneys in the past have felt justified in prosecuting foreign nationals doing business from their home country with US citizens via internet, mail, or phone, so it's not like the folks at ebay have any excuse to be surprised at the French ruling. And if France's courts are wrong for thinking they have a right to control commerce within and across their borders, then isn't every country wrong for doing the same?
However, you haven't drawn any kind of real parallel here. No one said you should be able to buy and sell things that are illegal to own.
Well, take prescription drugs then. Legal to own, illegal to sell in the US, unless you're a pharmacy. I bet one could dig up a number of similar examples.
BTW, I don't know any "USians." Perhaps you have a less offensive definition of that term than I find looking in the urban dictionary http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=USian. For the sake of civility, I would hope you do.
"1. Of or pertaining to the United States of America; 2. A Citizen of the United States of America". I read that the term may sometimes be interpreted with a pejorative connotation, which is not at all what I had in mind. Not being a native speaker is a somewhat limited excuse but it's all I have to offer :)
Philipp
dazedgonebye
07-13-2008, 06:35
Well, take prescription drugs then. Legal to own, illegal to sell in the US, unless you're a pharmacy. I bet one could dig up a number of similar examples.
A good example, given by another poster earlier. It does show that a system, correct (I think) in principal, can be wrong in practice. No doubt enough legislators have been purchased by drug interests to make that sort of thing possible. It is an exception and not the rule.
"1. Of or pertaining to the United States of America; 2. A Citizen of the United States of America". I read that the term may sometimes be interpreted with a pejorative connotation, which is not at all what I had in mind. Not being a native speaker is a somewhat limited excuse but it's all I have to offer :)
Philipp[/QUOTE]
Glad to hear it. I think any time you call someone something they would not call themselves, you run a risk. Over the last generation or so, US culture has done a good job of moving away from calling people from other lands by slang terms they may find objectionable.
I grew up with a name for just about every national or ethnic group that would sound insulting to their ears and you would never hear those names from me now.
Roger Hicks
07-13-2008, 11:26
. . . things that are illegal to own.
Preventing me from selling something I legally own is very nearly the same thing as taking that thing from me. I don't own it if I can't keep it or sell it at my discretion. Such a thing is contrary to the idea of property rights that are a fundamental part of the freedoms we are fond of over here.
Legal/illegal to own where? I think there may still be a couple of countries that permit slavery. Should you therefore be permitted to sell slaves world wide? And most countries ban at least some kinds of guns. Should you be free to sell any gun you like over the internet, merely because its possession is legal somewhere?
Cheers,
R.
Gabriel M.A.
07-13-2008, 11:48
eBay sells nothing.
eBay rents space on the internet for people to sell
eBay should have originally disavowed any type of security
eBay should have originally put the responsibility for security where it belongs... on the seller and buyers.
<snip>
Now, granted, eBay may not have grown under this format and be nearly as big as it is today, but I think it is entirely unreasonable for buyers and sellers to blame eBay for actions which are the sole responsibility of those buyers/sellers.
Which means that shopping malls also have no responsibility for security at the shopping malls. Each individual shop should have its own security, do their electrical wiring at their own expense, pay individually for each customers' parking lot, manufacture their own plastic or paper bags with plastic that they themselves create from the oil that they should pump themselves, or paper made from pulp from a tree that they should grow themselves and cut themselves.
It's the Buck-Stops-Elsewhere mantra and wet dream of every ethical, responsible, socially-conscious businessman (is there any other kind?) who are to be trusted absolutely with their own discretion about how things are to be run.
Laws are such an inconvenience to pocketbook growth!
Legal/illegal to own where? I think there may still be a couple of countries that permit slavery. Should you therefore be permitted to sell slaves world wide? And most countries ban at least some kinds of guns. Should you be free to sell any gun you like over the internet, merely because its possession is legal somewhere?
Cheers,
R.
I don't think anyone here was talking slaves or weapons. The items are handbags and perfume and the manufacturers control over their sale. The counterfeits issue is straightforward illegal, but the companies insistence that they should be able to control all sales of the real goods is a gray area that they themselves have created and it is wrong. There is no dealer of the real goods in quantity that got them anywhere except from the maker. The situation with prescription meds from Canada is much the same. The price of those meds is higher in USA because the laws were put in place to protect the makers. That,too, is wrong. On the topic, I think the ruling against ebay is about half right.
dazedgonebye
07-13-2008, 14:37
Legal/illegal to own where? I think there may still be a couple of countries that permit slavery. Should you therefore be permitted to sell slaves world wide? And most countries ban at least some kinds of guns. Should you be free to sell any gun you like over the internet, merely because its possession is legal somewhere?
Cheers,
R.
Silly.
Of course I mean my country controlling what I can own/buy/sell in my country.
Same as I mean ebay should obey French law in France...not in the US.
If I'm not mistaken - isn't it a frenchman that owns Ebay? And now this problem Ebay has with France. Hmmm. Kinda funny. ;)
Roger Hicks
07-14-2008, 03:58
On the topic, I think the ruling against ebay is about half right.
Pretty much my feelings, too. Absolutism never works, but the law sometimes has to lean in the direction of absolutism, and sometimes in the direction of turning a blind eye. It's just that some of the posts seemed to me to be veering towards free-market absolutism.
I am firmly of two minds on this one. On the one hand, if eBay went bust tomorrow, I wouldn't give a toss. On the other, anyone who thinks that a 'designer label' is worth anything, as compared with a well made product, deserves all they get - especially if they are greedy/stupid enough to buy fakes.
Then again, there are people who buy fakes as a joke, knowing they're fakes -- like the $25 'Rolex' my father bought in Turkey. I can't imagine he'd care if $25 'Rolexes' were banned tomorrow.
The ones I feel sorry for are the ones who are stupid enough to believe that they have the real thing, as apparently was the case with the widow of an old friend. Even at fake prices, they're paying a lot more than it's worth.
Cheers,
R.
blazeicehockey
07-14-2008, 04:23
When US and French law are at odds, the US law must prevail.
Wow, that is one hell of a dangerous assumption to make!
For example, it may be legal to carry and sell weapons in the U.S. [more freely] but I'll be damn sure that anyone going to court in Europe with the 'I bought it from an American website' defence won't get far.
What might be legal in one country might not be in another. Although french law is quite prescriptive, it still does not mean that U.S. law should prevail worldwide.
Darrin
Roger Hicks
07-14-2008, 04:31
Wow, that is one hell of a dangerous assumption to make!
For example, it may be legal to carry and sell weapons in the U.S. [more freely] but I'll be damn sure that anyone going to court in Europe with the 'I bought it from an American website' defence won't get far.
What might be legal in one country might not be in another. Although french law is quite prescriptive, it still does not mean that U.S. law should prevail worldwide.
Darrin
Dear Darrin,
I think it's fair to assume that he means that it must prevail in the USA, but the fact that this qualification was not added is a strong indicator of why the French imposed this fine: to remind people that there are other sovereign nations and (still more importantly) that some of those sovereign nations are unwilling to roll over and acqiesce whenever a big, powerful company disregards the law. The fine is perhaps bigger than it needs to be, but that's because it's intended as an attention getter, rather than just a fine. Otherwise, eBay might just pay it as a cost of doing business.
Cheers,
R.
blazeicehockey
07-14-2008, 04:51
Dear Darrin,
I think it's fair to assume that he means that it must prevail in the USA, but the fact that this qualification was not added is a strong indicator of why the French imposed this fine: to remind people that there are other sovereign nations and (still more importantly) that some of those sovereign nations are unwilling to roll over and acqiesce whenever a big, powerful company disregards the law. The fine is perhaps bigger than it needs to be, but that's because it's intended as an attention getter, rather than just a fine. Otherwise, eBay might just pay it as a cost of doing business.
Cheers,
R.
100% agree - I aliken this to a test case on international e-commerce law. Whislt the business model that LV and others may seem archaic in a world which is used to increased freedom of buy and sell, the bigger picture is that laws applying to single sovereign states are being tested.
Damn, I knew this MBA would influence my photography at some point :)
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.