Good news for sellers.

[ittybitnot]

If you don't feel like taking your own pictures and writing your own description...not to worry.  Just use someone else's on eBay.  Its ok now, and no longer a policy violation.  

See today's Weekly Chat.  The first post is from the user that is having issues with photo thieves.  See message #3. The second is the first reply from ebay staff, see message #8 that says and message #22 that says:

"I understand that many sellers invest large amounts of time and money into their listing photos and this is a great practice for their businesses. While we no longer consider it a violation for another member to use your photos, you do have the option of messaging the seller and asking them politely to not use your photos to see if they would be able to choose an alternative. Keep in mind, they are not violating eBay policy if your photos have been used on the site, so this should be framed as a friendly request if you choose to contact them. "

https://community.ebay.com/t5/Weekly-Chat-with-eBay-Staff/Community-Chat-May-8-1-00-pm-PT-General-To...

This seems very contrary to providing a great buyer experience:  Show them Item A, and ship them Item B.  We have been wondering why, even if a seller becomes a Vero member, their complaints go ignored.  Next thing we know all the sellers of CCC will be using photos of the REAL thing in the name of (insert your word of the day) consistency, efficiency .  

Quotes from the discussion:

"As for our adjustment to allow for photos posted to eBay to be used by any seller, this was introduced as a part of our focus on product based shopping and...."

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall. "

Good luck with this, be you a buyer or a seller.  I do not see this as a "good thing" whatsoever.  I look at it more that ebay got tired of dealing with it, so made it OK to do and no longer against the rules. 

[berserkerplanet]

All the more reason for me to not strive to not take **bleep** photos with bad lighting.

[18704d]

I've thought we've known..

for several years

That photos we upload

are part of eBay's content.. and available to any other seller who wishes to use them from the catalogue.

?

Lynn

[moldy5]

I saw this post also & it made my hair stand on end. How is it even possible that sellers can now legally steal photographic property from another seller? My God, they want us to turn on each other now? What kind of loser would even think this is even remotely acceptable behavior?   About 6 years ago I had a seller steal 2 photos of a collectible Michael Jackson ring I had for sale. My husband & I worked our keisters off taking over 50 pics between us in order to get 2 that were great shots. I KNOW my ring, it's background cloth & how it was positioned.  Then this person listed her same MJ ring but used my photos.  I pretty much went ballistic.  Sent her a message saying they were MY photos & to take them down, to get her own pics of the ring.  She apologized & after a month of not being listed at all, there was her ring again with MY photos. This time I called eBay to report & by God, someone there took care of the problem. I stopped looking for her listings after a year. Maybe she gave up on the ring or got kicked off.

Not sure.  But here we are a few years later & this seller is not here anymore. So today we have it confirmed that eBay will do nothing for us if this happens, theft of our property. Yet another reason to leave this failing "buyer's paradise".

[ittybitnot]

I've thought we've known..

for several years

That photos we upload

are part of eBay's content.. and available to any other seller who wishes to use them from the catalogue.

The discussion is not about "catalog" photos.  This is more like me snagging your photos from your listing and posting them on a listing of my own.  For example, supposed you are selling used tennis shoes.  I come along and just snag your photos for my used tennis shoes.  Its ok to do now.  Buyer is none the wiser that the shoes I am selling are not the shoes they are going to get.  If you see no problem with this, that is fine. That is why we have discussions. 

Though we know eBay has done little about photo thieves over the past year or so, they did allow sellers to become VERO members.  Ebay is supposed to act on VERO member's complaints, not ignore them or pick and choose which ones they will enforce, and which ones they won't.  If that is the case, then the whole VERO takedown program was a farce from the start. 

[fashunu4eeuh]

From the Weekly Chat discussion:

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall. "

But taking photos from another seller will NOT match the product someone else is selling. Therefore it CANNOT create consistency, but introduces chaos. It certainly gives the "borrower" an efficient experience but not anyone else, not the owner of the photos, nor the buyer of the copied item. Thus, it will NOT allow for a better experience overall. The only initial benefit will be to the dishonest or lazy seller. And when their item comes back to them as SNAD, then their benefit disappears as well. REALLY BAD POLICY CHANGE.

[annadryl]

This is utterly crazy. It's a complete 180 from what it used to be and what it should be. Sure, they want all new items now. But almost all of my current listings are pre-owned and in various conditions. How's a random generic pic going to represent my pre-owned book, garment, CD etc?

I've got a GI Joe guy who's missing a foot and a few fingers listed. In fact it's my only auction with bids now. My buyers certainly want to see the exact item they'll pay for. A random picture will NOT do in this case. It's 50 years old!

Thanks for posting, I think I might need a cold shower (or two) I'm almost not suprised anymore how silly things get!

[dqdnvwe0]

I don't really have a problem with it, if someone else wants to risk a SNAD that's fine by me, however I do have a problem with sellers stealing the idea itself as may pertain to truly OOAK/homemade items... When someone painstakingly builds an item by hand and here along comes the corporate troglodyte who can mass produce the same item much cheaper (mind you there is almost always a loss of some kind in duplication), then to top it all off they steal not just the pictures but the entire listing word for word.

That I have a problem with, but what can you do?

What can anyone really do?

Back in the old days we used to watermark our pictures.

Then one day ebay had the great idea of doing it for us, they even boastfully announced that we no longer had to do it since they would do it for us (and aren't ebay just the greatest for being so helpful)... I am guessing it was a long term plan to soft-eradicate these watermarks?

Perhaps start using them again.

[vintagecraze50]

I have seen people use stock photos of items we sell and they may have the same item, but if it is a used item it may or may not look like the stock photo.  That would be a real problem with this. If a buyer purchases something here and it ends up not being as pictured, that’s not a good experience for them.

[ed8108]

---

@ittybitnot wrote:

"I understand that many sellers invest large amounts of time and money into their listing photos and this is a great practice for their businesses. While we no longer consider it a violation for another member to use your photos, you do have the option of messaging the seller and asking them politely to not use your photos to see if they would be able to choose an alternative. Keep in mind, they are not violating eBay policy if your photos have been used on the site, so this should be framed as a friendly request if you choose to contact them

---

 Are some other platforms taking this position ? 

[sharingtheland]

---

@fashunu4eeuh wrote:

From the Weekly Chat discussion:

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall. "

But taking photos from another seller will NOT match the product someone else is selling. Therefore it CANNOT create consistency, but introduces chaos. It certainly gives the "borrower" an efficient experience but not anyone else, not the owner of the photos, nor the buyer of the copied item. Thus, it will NOT allow for a better experience overall. The only initial benefit will be to the dishonest or lazy seller. And when their item comes back to them as SNAD, then their benefit disappears as well. REALLY BAD POLICY CHANGE.

---

I thought the same thing when I read that.  And this:

"Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency

is simply not the case; the photos don't necessarily match the product.

I was shocked at the his factual statements - no weasel words.

There's a reason why I don't read Weekly Chat until after it ends; it's the only way to keep my fingers away from this keyboard.

[herecometheplayas]

I still have a few buyers using my pictures that have MY WATERMARK on them

[ersatz_sobriquet]

Runs off to learn about water marking. I'm behind the times. 

[gamersbaystore]

Seriously, the sellers that are stealing photos are just going to end up with negatives galore when the items they ship out don't fully match their pictures. The buyers here are too picky, you better send the exact item that's in the pictures, or you'll get buyers begging for refunds.

ebay doesn't seem to realize that the condition of a product is a huge factor in buying decisions.

As for those stealing sellers photos, you can still file a DMCA take down notice, as U.S. copyright law still protects your work, even from ebay. If they refuse your request, you then have the right to sue ebay, that's the law.

[tealt]

---

---

" Allowing our sellers to utilize photos that match the product they are selling creates consistency and efficiency within our platform, allowing for a better experience overall."

I read and re-read those words from Trinton on the weekly chat and scratched my head.

Perhaps, because I sell used/vintage/antique items that sentence made no sense to me.

If a buyer sees a photo of my used/vintage/antique item, and it's condition, how surprised/upset will that buyer be when they receive an item in different condition?  Because, of course, for used/vintage/antique items condition is often extremely important.  I can imagine many unpleasant buyer experiences because the photo in the listing was not a photo of the item they bought.

Perhaps Trinton was thinking only of new-in-the-packaging consumer items which can be purchased from many sellers, both foreign and domestic.  If that what he was thinking, I wish he had said so.