« May 2008 | Main | July 2008 »

30 June 2008

LVMH 1 - eBay 0

LVMH, the luxury goods group has secured a judgment against eBay for failing to stop the on-line auctioning of goods that infringe LVMH's intellectual property rights.The French court ordered eBay to pay €40m to LVMH. The brands involved include Dior, Givenchy and Louis Vuitton.  This is the second French judgment against e-bay this month with the owners of the Hermes brand successfully bringing an action against eBay and the actual seller of fake Hermes handbags.

One widely held view is that if eBay doesn't lose its wild west frontier image soon it could find itself prevented from listing any major brand name and as a result losing its attraction for all those bargain hunters who target branded luxury goods. But what can it do? It can ask its sellers to confirm that the goods offered for sale are legitimate. It can (and does) have a policy to deal with allegedly infringing goods and in my experience it is fairly good at removing goods quickly when a complaint is raised. The problem is how on earth can e-Bay tell if an article offered for sale in one of its auctions is the real McCoy?

eBay are now seeking leave to appeal against this latest judgment claiming that today's ruling was "an attempt by LVMH to protect uncompetitive practices at the expense of consumer choice and the livelihood of law-abiding sellers that eBay empowers everyday". Your gut reaction might be "that is all very well but what about the law abiding customers who think that they have a genuine bargain, the individuals burnt by fake perfumes or disappointed by shoddy copies of luxury branded goods?  eBay may be disinclined to bring in tighter supervision of its on-line auctions but it may be putting off the inevitable

The idea that entities like eBay should actively police their domains for infringement of third party rights provides fuel for the argument that the Internet should become highly regulated - possibly to the extent that user anonymity (there are many legitimate reasons for anonymity on the Internet) becomes compromised. Is this really somewhere we want to go? 

About IMPACT

Contact IMPACT

  • Feel free to email the IMPACT team with any suggestions for new content, or if you'd like us to assist you with any legal issues.

Search


  • search the web
    search IMPACT

The legal bit

  • The news and articles on IMPACT are not legal advice and you shouldn't rely on them as if they were. Please don't act on any of the information on this blog without getting professional advice on the subject. Like most free general information blogs, we don't accept any liability in connection with your use of the information on the site.

    If you do need specific legal advice, the team behind IMPACT would be delighted to help.

    Creative Commons License

    We post the information on this blog under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 2.0 Licence (English law). You provide any comments and materials that you make on the same Creative Commons licence terms.

    Find out why we use a Creative Commons licence.

    We've registered our brands as trade marks. The following links will take you to the registrations for IMPACT, Freeth Cartwright and FC.

Accessibility

  • We take accessibility very seriously. We want everyone to be able to access the stuff we've put on the blog. If you've got any comments or suggestions for how to make the blog more accessible, please email the team.

    To learn more about accessibility and why it's important see our article Making websites open to all. There are more accessibility posts in the Accessibility section of IMPACT.