Got an eBay Vero violation for showing a close up picture of the items tag????

[thevintageparadise]

So i posted an item a few days ago (it is hidden now so you can't see it) but it was a Build-a-Bear workshop bear from the Hudson Valley Renegades minor league baseball team.

Shortly after listing it I got a Vero notification about Logos. I used both the Build-a-Bear and the Hudson Valley Renegades Logo in the main photo. I totally understand the complaint, I revised the listing, took the first image out and waited to hear back. They said once again that the listing is in violation with no real explanation.

I called customer service and the rep told me i am not allowed to show close up pictures of the tags because the Build-A-bear logo is on the tag and it's copyrighted and I can't show the back of the tag because the Hudson Valley Renegades logo is also copyrighted.

I have never heard of something so asinine - I'm not allowed to show close up photos of the item I am selling???? To make matters even more ridiculous the tag on the back is ripped (so obviously I want to show that in the listing) the rep told me because the ripped tag shows their copyright I'm not allowed to show it.

Has anyone else had this issue? I'd understand if i was trying to sell a bear I personally made and slapped a Build-A-Bear patch on it but this is an item that THEY made

[winterpalace25]

If you list as New, they can say you are not an authorized distributor or retailer. Sometimes they have distribution contracts in place.

If you list as Used, they shouldn't have a say. If I have a new unused item that has tags, but I did not buy it from the manufacturer or a distributor, I list it as Used. Then in the Condition Box, I say, "Previously owned but never used. Retains tags."

[itscalledapostingid]

---

@winterpalace25 wrote:

If you list as New, they can say you are not an authorized distributor or retailer. Sometimes they have distribution contracts in place.

If you list as Used, they shouldn't have a say. If I have a new unused item that has tags, but I did not buy it from the manufacturer or a distributor, I list it as Used. Then in the Condition Box, I say, "Previously owned but never used. Retains tags."

---

@winterpalace25 

People need to be aware that's NOT a valid reason for a vero removal.

source: Verified Rights Owner Program | Seller Center

Ineligible reasons to report a listing

• Wanting to control where a product is resold by trying to enforce contracts or distribution of goods to authorized sellers (selective distribution).
• Not allowing the sale if items are below a controlled price point (minimum advertised pricing or MAP).
• Any terms a brand puts into their contracts that controls the way items are resold (contractual issues).

[robbie31415]

Yes but listing as New while not being an authorized seller typically means not providing with the warranties that would go with it. This obviously doesn't apply to every type of item but manufactures have gotten away with using 'Brand confusion'.

Typically best to list as New Other to prevent such 'confusion'.

"To protect its brand and prevent consumer confusion, Select Brands owns the rights to trademarks relating to its business (collectively, the “Select Brands Trademarks”).1 By advertising and selling products using the Select Brands Trademarks that do not come with the benefits that accompany genuine Select Brands products and that are not subject to Select Brands’ quality controls, you are using the Select Brands Trademarks illegally. Your repeated use and misappropriation of one or more of the Select Brands Trademarks constitutes unfair competition pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), common law trademark infringement, and a violation of numerous state laws. Moreover, if you continue to purchase Select Brands products for resale, you will be liable for intentionally and tortiously interfering with Select Brands’ contractual and business relationships with its Authorized Sellers. "

Do I really want to waste my time in court over a $20 coffee maker.

Not really.