- This topic has 34 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Hey guys,
So eBay removed one of my listings for the word Anthropologie. Unlike thousands of other listings my dress actually was sold at Anthropologie so I didn’t think I was misusing the word.
I called and the rep had no idea what I was talking about. She just parroted the email I got about how my dress was a different brand than “Anthropologie”. I’ve taken the word Anthropologie out of all my listings to make sure this doesn’t happen again. I can’t find anywhere to contact people showing proof that the dress was an Anthro dress. I know this is the kind of thing that gets people suspended. I got a listing removed about 1.5 years ago (more than a month after it sold…) for selling a skin cream that was prescription only so this is my second listing removal. How worried should I be about this?
-
If you have a link to the dress on the anthropologie website, I’d think that would be good evidence.
But with these eBay takedowns, it’s like speeding. Everyone speeds, but sometimes you’re the only one that gets caught. Instead of continuing to speed and get more tickets, it’s smart to just slow down.
So I would not relist the dress with anthropologie in the title. Plenty of other things to list and sell.
-
I took Anthropologie out of it before I relisted. People will find it without that word & I don’t want eBay to think I’m not listening to them.
I have this Link to Lyst that shows it was sold last at Anthropologie. Any idea how I show that to eBay though?
-
As to even talking with Ebay about the VERO program, personally I think it is a waste of time. They can’t speak for the companies who have signed onto the program and it is the original company who is claiming foul.
If you are going to report to anybody, I would suggest going directly to the company to try to prove it, but that may not even help.When we had a John Deere issue we went straight to John Deere, told them we bought it from a Tractor Retailer in a small farm town. Their response was, so what, if you are not one of our dealers or authorized re-sellers of our brand then no.
That then leads to the question as I put into the long reply below about what rights does one have once you buy something and can we show the logo, state the name as a re-seller and then re-sell something?
Who knows.. Read the links I included in the long reply and see for yourself. Especially what the Feds are saying about it.
mike in atl.
-
I assume VERO program was created by eBay to avoid being sued by brands for being an accomplice in selling counterfeits.
Now these companies have a way to take down items and eBay is off the hook.
-
You hit the nail right on the head. I think they didn’t want to get the reputation like Craig’s List and be part of supporting the proliferation of re-selling counterfits and the such. Bad for Ebay’s image and brand and Ebay wants to build buyer trust, especially now a days.
-
-
-
-
-
I’ve had my than my share of hand-slaps for selling unapproved items and VeRO violation, two in 1 month. And 2 so far this year. All for different reasons and none purposely. Some questionable and unclear as to why, but I pick my battles and prefer to accept the decision.
And although there no set number, if this is second in over 1.5 years, I wouldn’t worry about it. Individuals that I have talked to that have been suspended or kicked off have all been repeat offenders. Trying to skirt the system by attempting relist the same items they were in violation to begin with. Some creative… listing in different categories, misspelling the product name and so forth. Makings of their own decisions.
As sellers, EB tells us that we need to visit the VeRO page before listing any item. Yeah, right. If there weren’t hundreds or even thousands of them. It would be nice that if a brand name is required, we get a warning message as to a possible violation before an item is listed. But that makes too much sense.
-
-
I agree with this whole heartly eCom. You would think a “possible violation” would pop up. Their is a specified field box for Brand. They ask use to put Brand Name in the item specifics area, yet according to my response letter I recieved back from John Deere I was not even authorized to state their brand name, show their logo in any photographs in order to re-sell one of their products for profit or personal gain with being an “authorized reseller”. Which is baloney. But I did as you state. I threw the item into my donate pile and moved on.
But it is an interesting situation as my longer reply and the several links to other site indicate below.
And we have all had to re-do listings just to remove the word “Velcro” from titles and / or descriptions because Velcro is intense on that word just not being included in any listing in any shape or form.
mike
-
-
Hi Maggie.. VERO is an interesting program and is mainly an Ebay invention. Ebay has a list of all of the companies that have signed up for and participate in the VERO Program. The main focus from the Manufacturers or the “Brand” franchise is that when we as Ebay sellers try to sell their merchandise we are not authorized resellers. In other words the original point of sale authorized dealers. They seem to not want anybody to “re-sell” their stuff unless we have been approved to do so.
Now also many companies also include into the VERO program the protection against any one selling knocks offs, reproductions of their original items which is all encompassing along with the thought that we are not authorized to sell their brand anyway.
and this link takes you to a private web site where the members list over 160 companies that they have recived VERO notices from and or had their listings removed.
As you read down this list keep in mind that basically what these companies want is #1) don’t sell counterfeit items of our “brand” and #2 Don’t use our name, to sell our original items under your store name even though they are genuine and original, while using our name to do so, since you are not an authorized re-seller. Example: Velcro as we all know is a “hook and loop” invention and many of us have hats and other articles that have “velcro” fasteners and most are probably “original” Velcro material [some may not be], but Velcro just doesn’t want anyone to use their “Brand Name” in their listing in order to “RE_SELL” something. They are worried about it being original velcro or not, because all hook and loop processes do work the same. It is just a matter of don’t use our name.
“Coach” takes both stances, don’t sell knocks off and call them Coach and also don’t use our name to go re-selling our merchandise in your little Ebay, Craigslist or elsewhere.
The point though is as an “original buyer” of one of these items have we also bought the right to re-sell our personal items to anybody or anyway we want without the “original” company getting involved and trying to control us as a re-seller. What rights do we have once we buy an item. We can buy a car and re-sell it and use any and all names in a listing. It is ours and we have a title to it. Would not the same apply to a “Coach” purse?
Here is the link to the current Ebay VERO program. You can read down and see that
unless authorized” we may be in gray area of even showing a logo without being authorized to do so? As Ryanee says.. “WHAAAT”! How can we photograph our items and not show the logo.http://pages.ebay.com/seller-center/listing/create-effective-listings/vero-program.html
So this is where the rub comes in. It all boils down to what rights does one have ounce they buy something from someone else and what rights do you have to re-sell it in any venue, anyway you want as long as you don’t misrepresent it. So someone finally last year took all of this to a higher level. I am unsure of the final out come, but click and read the link below for some of the proceedings. As for me personally I just don’t pay much attention to it and list my items and call a spade a spade. except on those items that I too have personally gotten VERO Notices from. I have gotten VERO’s for several uses of brand names in which the items were original merchandise. In the case of really old vintage items where the companies are out of business then most of us are safe and also items made by companies in foreign countries.
This makes it a very interesting scenario and because the VERO Program is mostly an Ebay Invention to cover their you know what’s, it got taken to court and to Congress.
See this link that talks about Congress, the Federal Law and Ebay and their VERO list of companies and the program. It is two pages and covers several topics and questions about the VERO Program.
Page one:
https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/Listing-of-Brand-Names-on-the-VeRO-List/td-p/25364325
Page two:
https://community.ebay.com/t5/Selling/Listing-of-Brand-Names-on-the-VeRO-List/td-p/25364325/page/2This process of VERO has become such a big deal that BRAND Companies now hire thrid party companies to do nothing but scour the internet to find their names being used in re-sell situation and reporting them. Also on e-Commerce Bytes there is a thread that folows along a re-seller who sued one of the third party companies for infringeing on his rights to re-sell. Unsure if that is what led to the big to do in Congress.
Now the short version to your personal issue.
What we have done is any time we get a VERO, we filter all of our listing by the brand or key word(s) and then edit the listings to try to use another word in it’s place. As for the actual listing taken down, we tried editing one several times and different ways and it got killed very quickly several times in a row, so we just donated it and went on.It is a random hit on you and even though many others may have the same item and use the same words and brand just set it off to the side for now, what a while [maybe 6 to 8 weeks ] then re-shoot the photos and try to use different ways to describe it and then re-list it.
Good luck and you are not the only one at SL that has had a VERO. It happens and will continue until it all gets worked out with regards to the who owns what rights law.
mike at mdc galleries in Atlanta
-
Thanks Mike!
I’m not actually sure this is a VERO violation. I think it violates eBay’s search & browse manipulation policies as seen here . I think a user reported my listing as violating those policies instead of a company going through the VERO system. The email doesn’t say anything about me not being allowed to use the word Anthropologie just not allowed in this listing because it was misleading.
I took out the word Anthropologie & relisted it right away. Do you think I should take it down and wait for a few weeks to do an entire new listing? I figured without the “manipulating” word it would be good.
-
Hi again.
As eCom. says above. Try to ick your battles and VERO or other use of prohibitive words is a battle we choose not to fight. It is trying to prove Ebay or their policies as wrong and we rather try to side to the good side with Ebay.
I would pull it and not try to dog it. It and that item ID has been flagged in the Ebay system as well as maybe your account. Also it takes numerous violations from another Ebay memebers before Ebay acts on something and if they acted, there may be others who has reported either it or you on this. Pull it and give it some breathing time, then do a complete new lsit with everything new, photos, descript, title, item specifics, condition, all new words and then list. If you want to go to the trouble. We now just dump it and move on.
But just my opinion. It is not like you have a $100 dollar bill invested in it. [at least I hope not??? LOL :-)]
mike
-
-
-
Never paid attention to the details of my last violation. It was for trademark violation. A used shirt with a Porsche logo and an embroidered outline of a 911. Even though the message directed me to the general VeRO page, Porsche doesn’t even have VeRO page on EB. But the message did have an email address of a person at Porsche if I wanted to discuss it further.
Turns out only approved dealers and sellers can sell Porsche apparel. Both new and used. Whaz up with that?
-
Yep… Just as my long reply goes into and what was included in a few law suits and what I think the Higher Up courts are still working on. What rights does one get when we buy. As an artist, I kow that I my artwork is protected by copy right law and if you buy one of my paintings you can re-sell it or auction it. But I still keep the copy right to it and you can’t reproduce my image, photograph it, make photo copies of it or if I insisted even show it online without my written permission!!! So I guess this is where the rub comes ito play. As an Ebay reseller according to the wierd laws, I can photo, post and sell my own artwork / paintings but am in violation if I photo, post and sell other artists work??? Whaaat!! A real contridiction even I say so myself.
Mike
-
-
-
What if you put that magic Anthropologie RN number in the listing title? Just a thought. I mean, people probably don’t search by RN, but those who are seeking Anthro clothes will recognize it.
-
Hey HabNab: The whole point of these companies that are serious over their logo, brand, name and merchandise is this. They don’t want anyone to be re-selling their stuff. They don’t want you to use a photo of their items, mention their name, mention any numbers, don’t say their name, don’t show thier item because they are only interested in the “first sale / Original buyer”. They don’t want their stuff on the secondary market or to be re-sold.
Then from their as the long reply links show if you click, follow and read is what are the rights of the “original buyer” to do what they want with something they have bought and do they have the right to use the English language i.e. words to mention the “brand” in a re-selling listing, show a photo of the item which will include the logo and the item itself.
As eCom says and as John Deere told me in a formal letter from them. I am not an authorized deealer or seller and I have no right to re-sell their items if I mention their name, show thier products or show their logo. In essence they don’t wany anyone whom they haven’t authorized or maybe [probably] have “paid them” for the right to re-sell.
They don’t care about Ebay or it’s success or failure. They don’t care about us as Scavenger’s or Craislist, 5 Mile, pop up small businesses or anything. Just that they don’t want you to say their name, mention their brand, show their product or logo, nothing, nadda. Take the “used” item off the internet and do whatever we want with it but don’t try to resell it. We are not authorized to do so.
So with that said mentioning any numbers, showing the label only, even showing a photo of the item if the see it they will want you to cease and desist.
So where are we left as re-selllers, hoping that the Federal Court and Congress will extend the right to an “original” buyer or in many cases even a second or third buyer the right to shoe, tell, speak, describe and re-sell “used” items on the secondary market.
As most of us do and as eCom and Jay says, we just chalk it up to the fact that out of hundreds of millions of listers we are just unfornutae to have been caught speeding {LOL} and we just slow down, be aware and keep doing what we are doing despite what the VERO companies want. It is not like the Ebay VERO police are staking out our house or we are going to VERO jail. But if we persist and throw it up in their faces we can get ourselves into some Ebay trouble. So as Jay says, just keep on doing what we have all been doing, Ebay supporting VERO keeps Ebay from getting sued and from getting a black eye and bad reputation.
Good luck to all of us, we all need to just keep on truckin!!!
mike
-
Aw! I think “Keep on Truckin'” is trademarked 🙂
-
Yeah… so is “Damn the Defiant, Full Speed Ahead”! 🙂 But that is what we do and have been doing forever. We all built our businesses on it.
I will buy anything I can get for a dollar and sell for $35 any day of the week including Porsche!! 🙂
mike
-
I hear ya! Until the big man shuts you down. So it’s list sell… list sell… list, removal, hand-slapped… [REPEAT]
As my 80+ year old aunt once said to a police officer when she was pulled over for speeding “The only reason you pulled me over was you couldn’t catch the others.” Yep. She was ticketed… her first.
Respectfully, Callused Hands
-
-
Hey Jay and eComm. …
Talk about some bad Ju-Ju. Believe or not I re-listed about a dozen items this morning on the 30 day then end listing and re-list cycle. Then took off for a thrift store trip then when I returned a little while ago.. Guess What??? A notice from Ebay saying that one of the items I relisted was taken down automatically due to making a comparison to a brand name use violation.
Yes I did, in error and oversight and yes it was my fault, in haste of listing something it just didn’t dawn on me at the time of listing what I was saying. It was a stained glass table lamp but it was my bad. I said Tiffany Style in the description and it got caught. This item has been listed and re-listed every 30 days since last summer and BANG, now I got hit. I just edited it, cut out the word Tiffany and re-listed.
Talk about coincidence… as soon as I engage in a discussion on SL about the VERO program and brand infringement, I get caught within hours and get “my speeding ticket” LOL 🙂 Can you believe that!!
mike at mdc galleries in atlanta
-
-
-
A follow up.
Here is an interesting way to look at it. Go to Ebay’s list of companies that participate in the VERO program. There are hundreds on the list. Then think about every item you have in your store that has one of or multiples of those names somewhere in your listing. Then any one or all of those listings “could-may” have the potential to get a VERO if some of those companies find you, see you or get a wild hair about you.
Read down the list one of my links somewhere above and it takes you to a web site that has a long list of some of the companies [but not all] that are on Ebay’s VERO list. This web site has asked people to reply if they have had a VERO sent to them and if so, which companies have sent it to them. Well that list 160 companies long. That is proof that those companies are active with seeking out the use of their name, logo’s and what not. John Deere is certainly on the list, one which got me twice in the past. Think I will ever list anything by John Deere again.
I had a cap with a John Deere patch on it and I had a old metal toy John Deere tracktor, and both got taken down and I got a VERO both times.If we read the list and run “scared” just think how many items we would pass on, not buy or not re-sell. And, in my opinion, that is exactly what these companies want to achieve. It is nothing in their profit picture that has any advantage to allowing us to re-sell anything of their’s that is not new. They don’t get a dime from it. But if they can kill off the re-selling of their items then if you want their brand item, you must go buy new from one of their “authorized” sellers.
again … just personal opinion stuff here. But….???
mike
-
-
-
I’m not expert, but these are my thoughts. For $5 I think you are smart to take it down. It makes you look like a very cooperative and reasonable seller.
Anthropologie is my bread and butter, but I have receipts for almost all of my new inventory and try to use my own photos (using stock photos is a no no, though pervasive). What’s even more interesting is that Anthropologie is often an authorized reseller for other manufacturers bearing their own brand names and not Anthro’s, like your dress. It shouldn’t be illegal to say it was available for sale at some point at Anthro if that is, in fact, a true statement, but if the product label doesn’t have the name it can arguably be considered by Ebay as spamming. Interestingly, this is not one of the examples included on their guidelines.
It seems to be eBay’s policy not to get involved with who is authorized to sell products: “VeRO may only be used by rights owners to submit claims of alleged intellectual property infringement. eBay doesn’t accept reports from rights owners alleging violations of selective distribution agreements, MAP policies, or other contractual agreements.” Thank goodness.
Manufacturers like Velcro have experienced trademark erosion due to their brand name becoming primary meaning of the actual type of product. The onus is on them to actively protect against people selling generics or knock offs with the Velcro brand name, or else lose it like kleenex, thermos and others have in the past. So, companies on the master Ebay list are probably ones you may want to avoid because they are in some degree of protection mode with their brands. Ebay won’t get in the middle of it, so I’d just be cooperative if flagged unless you really want to spend the time to take it up with the retailer and can prove its authenticity because it’s marked with the name brand, etc.
The other issue raised above is that Ebay does indeed prohibit photos of the logo. Hmm. Also, I never realized before that you can’t do a ? if you aren’t sure, but that makes sense and I rarely do it. Probably safe on vintage items if the company isn’t around.
-
Great Reply Christine: All said and done we all seem to be on the same page. “Just Keep on Truckin”
And agreed, there are a bunch of inconsistencies in the Ebay policies with this thing called VERO. Wonder if Ebay will ever revisit this at some point in the future? It has been the same for a number of years now.
Probably not even on their radar as long as they aren’t blamed for anything by those companies.
mike
-
Christine – This was sold at Anthropologie but eBay doesn’t really care. I think the confusion is that Anthropologie is a brand & a store. Even in the email they sent me they just recommended that I take out the word that is in violation and relist without it. This wasn’t Anthropologie coming down on me but another buyer reporting me for search manipulation & eBay agreeing. I’ll just be careful about putting Anthro in the title in the future. I’m going to skip using it for in-house brands too just so eBay doesn’t think I’m ignoring them!
It really doesn’t relate to the VERO program at all because it was just eBay policies.
-
-
I’ve never been hit except for one time when I listed a pair of Cole Haan Nike Air shoes. I incorrectly spelled Haan in the title and it triggered a VERO takedown from Nike. After a phone call to Ebay, I was able to relist with the correct spelling.
I thought the VERO was all about counterfeiting and things like velcro. Didn’t realize that companies like John Deere or Porsche had a leg to stand on unless what you’re reselling was a infringement from the time it was manufactured.
What about the First Sale Doctrine?
-
Terri: That is what all of the hub-bub is about in Congress and with the courts. Check out some of my links in previous posts and also further down in the Wiki posts you posted. The snag is in the use of “digital” means in reproducing and / or selling. It gets deep into the weeds. Your Wiki article even goes on to say that the “First Sale Doctrine” needs to be modernized to include the “digital age”. Some copies are claiming that once you buy their article as a “first buyer” yes you can re-sell it. BUT, you just can’t use photos of it and or their logo and name then post it “digitally” online, save the image to servers and your hard drives, etc., etc. In other words you can walk up and down the street and sell it to your neighbors by carrying the item, showing it physically, talking about it, etc. it’s yours to sell. BUT photograph it, store it on your hard drive, then upload it to Ebay’s file servers [who gave you permission to do that, is there stance], then you go and post it, to show it online, mention their name, show their logo in order to enhance the potential for a quick sale and a higher priced sell because of their Brand recognition, then no way unless you are going to pay us for those rights and priviledges.
See there stance is if you say you have a used golf shirt for Sale no problem, but say it is a Tiger Woods Collection, state it has a Nike Swoosh on the front left and on the sleeve and it has the Tiger Woods TW logo on the back collar and put a price on it for $89.95 used. Then their contention is, it is because of everything you stated in the desciption and title and by reinforcing it with photos of those Trade Marks we have successfully been able to push the price of the shirt up to almost $100 by capitalizing on the “brand” recognition.
it is a very “Gray” area and I have read in the past so many conflicting things about it. Lawyers can even seem to agree or disagree. It keeps getting interpreted differently to fit the situation. I am just a novice who has read a few articles on the topic. Enough to make me finally give up on it and my conclusion is it is way too much to worry about.
What I guess they would like for all of us to do, is buy that same shirt for $1.00. Then list the shirt as a used, soiled, smelly, golf shirt with beer stains on it and sell it for $5-$7. But use everything I just listed above to “enhance” and “bump” the desireability and perceived value up and now their feathers are ruffled. So they hire 3rd party companies to seek out listings that have whatever it is that trips their trigger and has it reported.
I have had VERO’s from Bonanza. Then took it down. Then posted weeks later on Ebay, boom, same letter. Gave it to Goodwill and took a $10 tax deduction and not a word from anybody. Maybe I can make more by donating everything and claiming high value and make a living off of doing that. Just like the farmers who get paid to not plant and grow corn or get paid to not raise pigs??? LOL 🙂
Yep it is all a bunch of you know what and most of us here at SL just keep on truckin as we have said. If they find any of us doing something they don’t like then get ready for your VERO. It is just the luck of the draw like Jay’s speeding ticket analogy.
If you wish to pick this as your battle, then start writing your Congressman and calling every company on the VERO list and tell them to take a long walk off a short pier! LOL 🙂
Now I am not being disrespectful of anybody here. I believe we all really don’t give a hoot about NIKE making any more money off of the reselling of their products with new brand basketball shoes costing $600 and more new. And I think we all can agree, we are glad they do make them and sell them for high prices because when we find them for $25 we can re-sell for $225.
Wonder what Louie Vitton ?? Thought about J&R re-selling one of their luggage pieces for several thousands of dollars and it was all because they used their brand name in the listing?? LOL. Other than it being a LV brand item, it was just an old piece of luggage.
I tell you if these companies wanted to and go, jerk-o-zoid on us I probably would have to remove 1/2 to 2/3rds of my store. Brand names are used as my first keywords,
Sunbeam, Kosta Boda, Kodak, Tiger Woods, Nike, Swingline, HESS, Shell Oil, Stanley Hardware, Tiffany, Swarovski, on and on.Now this is just an example of why it is so convoluted and I am unsure if it will ever get cleared up. And with other, much bigger issues on their plates, I think this is way down to “To-Do” list for the guys in Washington.
So, like me, eComm., many others here, J&R, we are all just going ahead [with caution] and doing what we have all been doing and letting the chips fall where they may.
I have listed about 50 golf shirts over the last few dyas and used every brand name on the label for everyone and also have included the Golf Courses names on the ones that are embroidered on the fronts. If I get a VERO, I will just pull and move on.
-
-
Mike, thanks for pointing out the digital distinction. I just googled “First Sale Doctrine” and shared the link without reading it. I read up on it many years ago (anyone remember Taberone? on the Power Seller Board?) but haven’t kept up. Never heard the digital argument. Interesting.
-
Maybe I am slow, but used goods are different than new goods. We are careful not to list the typical VERO items as new, but we will do it all the time as used and have never had an issue. We are careful not to list something as “like” or “sold by” any of the VERO enforcers.
But I do not hestitate to list something made by Harley Davidson, Nike, etc. so long as I list it as used.
Is this whole discussion about listing as new? Or as sold by?
-
No, it is not about anything being new or used. It is about selling something that is a “brand” name and re-selling it without being licensed by the original company to do so. It is about saying and showing thier trademarks without their permission and of course about re-selling something that is or could be a “counterfiet” with their name on it and also us not being an authorized re-seller or having the item authenticated as a “real”, “non-fake” item.
Velcro is the best example. You can’t even say that word, even if the article has “real” Velcro on it, in a listing or you may get a VERO. New, old, used or no matter how you sell it or where you sell it, if it is online and you use the word Velcro you might get a cease and stop it letter. Basically we don’t want you to resell anything online if you are going to put our company or product name in your listing. We don’t care if you bought it new and you think you can do what you want with it. You can’t if you use that word in trying to sell it. Also how do we know from only a couple of pictures that you have a “real” Velcro item or it is some knock off Velcro. We can’t tell from your listing so we would just rather you not sell it. And as also mentioned in a post above, it has to do with loss of market and the brand name becoming synonymous with a product Like Xerox and Kleenex.
The John Deere metal toy tractor I bought at auction was made back in the 1940’2 – 1950’s. I guess John Deere had authorized only certain companies to make the toy tractors for them. From my photos John Deere had no way of knowing, nor did I, that this 60 year old toy tractor was made by one of those originally authorized companies so rather than take a chance, I get a VERO and Ebay took it down. According to what is being played out here, while it couldn’t be proven one way or the other it was a “fake”, “copy”, “knock-off” just from looking at my photos. And yes it was mine, I bought it in used condition, they lean on the fact that I photographed it, showed their logo in my photos, posted that logo online and re-sold this item, not knowing if fake or real at a higher price and was able to do so by me leaning on the fact that “John Deere” is a collectible name in many markets and categories. So, according to them I treaded on their brand recognition to enhance and succeed in the sale of my item.
If I had spray painted it jet black and listed it as only an old, vintage, metal toy tractor I would have been fine. I would have maybe gotten $.50 or a $1 for it. But as soon as I said it was a John Deere Toy tractor approx. 70 years old, photographed it with a close up of the logo, I got John Deere attention.
My neighbor was stating what about museums and auction houses? Well museums and also high end auction houses always produce catalogs of the items they are shwoing in a show or selling and they ususally give the credits to the original artists and I think probably get permission to photograph the originals and show them in their catalogues. But what about local auctions. I would guess if the VERO Companies had a way to see and find them, they too may get a stop it letter. I am going to ask a few of my local auctioneers about this, this coming weekend.
So nope, not about listing it new, used or what method you use to list it. Not about what you list, it is about how you list it regardless and what words, phrases and photos you use to do so in order to make money at the expense of using a companies logo, name, brand recognition. A very gray area as most of us agree as re-sellers, we don’t care and will just keep on listing. 99.89% of the re-sellers don’t get a VERO I am guessing just like Jay’s speeding analogy. We all do it and a lot but very few get caught. And until the laws get very clear on what rights we have to re-sell anything, new or used, and what rights we have to show logos, photographs of objects and how we handle digital materials of objects we sell, again… We all will just keep on truckin!
mike at mdc galleries in Atlanta
-
Oh .. Here is something I came across last night while researching this topic further. If you buy a product made by a company that has strong brand recognition, you can’t tear it up, cut it up and use parts or pieces in an art object or craft project and then sell that object as your own item made by you without getting permission from the company to do so and / or giving credit to the original company. Supposedly you can’t take Pillsbury Flour sacks, cut then up and use them in a home made quilt for re-sell without getting permission or giving credit. And if you do re-sell them then you can’t use the words Pillsbury and would guess we can’t digitize any of it???
As an contemporary artist and fine art and commercial printer how Andy Warhole got away with the Soup Can, Brillo boxes, etc., etc. Did he write and get permission to use those images in his art work. Did Jasper Johns with his “Savarin” coffee can bronze pieces? Do the auction houses give credits when they create thier high end art cataloques of these pieces when they Re-sell? Maybe just by mentioning the names in the titles is enough for the original companies. Maybe companies like to be associated with high end, high profile celebrity situations which adds to their brand recognition. But be associated with a small time, re-seller on Ebay, guess not.
But also remember that VERO is a creation of Ebay. Not an offcial USA documented program and or Federal Law. As Jay said, it is most likely, and I agree as do others, that it is a vehicle to keep Ebay out of the sling and in the good graces of high profile companies that could make life tough on them. Who knows, maybe a lot of these companies advertise with Ebay and Ebay tries to appease them anytime they get upset by a listing using their product, logo or name. Who really knows.
In reality, I think almost all of the companies don’t care, have better things to do, could careless about Ebay and re-sellers and who re-sells, them, where they sell and what they show and / or how they describe them. And it is mostly newer companies.
We have come across many older ceramic pieces that had Roseville, Fuller, Murano, McCoy on them from the 1940’s and 1950’s and we know how to spot whether they are reproductions or not. I have listed and sold some. Most people don’t even know how to tell, but we list them as reproductions because we do know how to tell.
mc at mdc in atl.
-
-
-
Hi Maggie,
I saw that and I think Ebay should update their policies since saying what retailer you bought it from or previously sold it is not one of their examples and is factual information. Thing is, probably Anthro is a more common search term. I’d guess a lot of casual Anthro fans would not necessary search by the specific brand name. It’s interesting that you were told it was another ebay user and not Anthro complaining. Makes me wonder what shopper would take the time to bother? I’ve heard some Youtubers mention a 10 or 30 day suspension from listing new items. I believe their pulls (3) were pretty close together in time, but I don’t remember the specifics.BTW, I noticed a few months ago that Anthro is removing all of their old pages with the stock photo (since you could previously call up old stock photos using Google images or Pinterest). I’ve also heard that a bunch of Youtubers are frequently talking about reselling Anthro brands. Target has a new knock off line. Sales are soft too, so it might make sense that they get more assertive in protecting their brand and IP. So, maybe you are right to be cautious and fix your other listings. Since I sell home items, I’m leaving Anthro on even if there is another base brand (in a few cases). I’ll let you know if I get something pulled.
The general discussion was interesting. I have to admit that I followed the herd as a new seller and didn’t really bother reading all of the specifics. Startling the lack of enforcement on these rules. Not many cops handing out speeding tickets but as online selling takes hold, maybe more to come?
-
Replying to this year old thread to say two things: Got my first VERO in a while. It was for a Porsche Patch and they said “Your listing was removed after the rights owner reported it as counterfeit.” which I’m sure it isn’t but oh well, I’m not fighting for a $10 patch. I’ve sold Porsche stuff before with no problems so maybe they are doing a yearly sweep. Posting this for others to be on the lookout for their Porsche items being removed.
Also, above in the old thread someone said that Porsche wasn’t named in the list here:
but Porsche is owned by Volkswagen, which is listed, so they actually are.
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.