ChocolateDimple - 3:43 am on Nov 30, 2010 (gmt 0)
This argument is nonsense. For Tiffany's to go after every offender is entirely unreasonable. eBay is the clear enabler and a direct profiteer of illegal activity at Tiffanny's direct expense.
I agree with you that eBay does enable and profit from these untoward activities. However, what is Tiffany's objective of this law suite? If they are in it just to recover losses because eBay has directly cost them an inconvenient expense, then you would be right to go after eBay.
If they want justice as Demaestro points out, to curb the problem they have to go after the offenders and send a message to all future offenders that the law can and will get them.
If they got I.P.s of sellers, requested ISP to name the holders of the I.P.s and named them as co defendants in the case then I would believe that they are interested in justice.
Assuming drinking is a crime, if an alcoholic finds his regular bar shutdown, would that deter him from drinking or would he just find a new bar? Sure, the bars are wrong to sell liquor but how many do you want to shutdown before you realize the bars aren't the problem? The culture of drinking has already been cultivated, you have to curb the culture. Shutting down bars only promotes more underground ones to prosper.