How can you/Ebay tell if it’s a real Tiffany necklace?

Hot on the heels of the French court decison that Ebay was not doing enough to prevent the sale of counterfeit goods comes a different decision in the USA.

Tiffany sued Ebay for roughly the same reasons.

But US District Judge Richard J Sullivan in New York said Ebay was not liable for trade mark infringement “based solely on their generalised knowledge that trade mark infringement might be occurring on their websites.”

Ebay’s VeRO (verified rights owners) program, allowing trade mark owners to request the removal of counterfeit listings, was enough. There was no obligation on Ebay to preemptively take down suspicious listings for Tiffany jewellery or to force sellers to post more product information to guarantee authenticity, like series numbers.

Tiffany will need to continue employing people to monitor Ebay listings. I wonder how much the cost of doing this adds to the Tiffany retail price?

French court penalises Ebay €39 million

LVMH, owner of luxury brands like Dior and Louis Vuitton, has won a case against Ebay for its role in the sale of fake luxury goods. A French court awarded LVMH compensation of €39 million ($66 million) for damage to brand image and moral harm.

Ebay immediately said it would appeal the ruling.

Ebay says that it is doing all it can through its VeRO (verified rights owners) program which allows trade mark owners to request the removal of counterfeit listings. LVMH disagrees, saying that Ebay profits from the sale of counterfeit goods.

An analogous situation: landlords in countries like the US and Australia are not responsible for their tenants selling counterfeit products, whereas China has taken a hard line and fines landlords (see my earlier post on a Louis Vuitton case). A landlord is under no obligation to kick out a tenant even after that tenant is caught. Arguably, Ebay is in the same position as the landlord of a market.

Should Ebay be responsible for the sale of counterfeit goods online?