Forum Moderators: buckworks
Jeweller Tiffany has begun an appeal against a court ruling that eBay was not primarily responsible for ensuring fake goods were not sold on its site.Tiffany argued that eBay should be responsible for policing the site.
However, a US court decided in April that the primary burden for protecting a brand lay with its owner.
Earlier stories
Tiffany & Co Argues eBay is Distribution Network For Counterfeits [webmasterworld.com]
eBay Cleared By Court In Jewelry Counterfeit Case [webmasterworld.com]
I fear this will somehow fall under the umbrella of Minimum Advertised Price policies and price floors. I am no lawyer, but I think a good legal mind wouldn't need to stretch to find some link between the Supreme Court's ruling last year granting boutiques a new power in brand management. Seems to me that even a fake/knock-off Tiffany product carries the Tiffany brand...and therefore Tiffany could legitimately enforce restrictions which effectively make EBay a responsible party; does EBay have a Tiffany section? Anything that would make their control of the products implicit?
Also, from the Atlanta Business Chronicle's article from 8/12:
The companies, instead, may rely on the holders of intellectual property to monitor the sites. And in return the sites are required to take down offending material when they're notified about it.
I believe the Boutique Brand Law (my name for it) means that intellectual property/trademark holders must monitor fair usage, but that any violation means they are able to pursue legal recompense; even cut you off from listing their products. What is fuzzy for me is: do fake items listed under the Tiffany name fall under this jurisdiction? Do they lose branding rights the minute they claim an item is not theirs?
No. The brand is theirs, the physical item is not. The legitimate claim is that the brand is being abused because the item is fake.
Jim
No. The brand is theirs, the physical item is not. The legitimate claim is that the brand is being abused because the item is fake.
Sorry, half formed thought when I asked that question. I already acknowledged this:
Seems to me that even a fake/knock-off Tiffany product carries the Tiffany brand...and therefore Tiffany could legitimately enforce restrictions which effectively make EBay a responsible party
I meant to inquire as to whether something listed as "Fake/Knock-off Tiffany" is just as liable as "Tiffany" -- I have only a cursory knowledge of branding, intellectual property rights, trademarking, etc. What is the interplay of the Tiffany rulings and the MAP/Price Floor/Boutique Brand Law from last year? They seem at odds to me and I am not sure of the key difference between them. Any clarification would be well received.
does EBay have a Tiffany section? Anything that would make their control of the products implicit?
I feel for Tiffany and any other brands that are being targeted with counterfeits on Ebay. It has to be tough to see a major retailer listing fakes under your product name. Ebay is extremely poor at eliminating counterfeiters not only in this area, but in the memorabilia ones as well. It has become a breeding ground for fraud.
