Using "stock photo" for used items

[springvalleywi]

I have come across a seller who is selling their pretty much identical used items but is using the same photo, like his/her own stock photo for each item. Items have been altered and photos are shown of the alteration but the picture that shows up in the search results are exact.  There is not another picture provided of the front of the item. Again, items are used, but altered and  are not exactly alike and can vary greatly because it is a handmade item.  My question is is that allowed and is it OK that I point out that I do not use stock photos in my listings like a competitor does?   Also, can you call something new if it has been altered?? I play by the rules and wonder why others do not have to.

[ted_200 · Accepted solution]

My question is is that allowed...

I don't think it's specifically prohibited outright, but I think it violates some eBay "best practices" verbiage about pictures accurately depicting the item being sold.  My guess is that they consider "don't use stock photos for used items" to mean "don't use a stock of a new item to sell your used item". 

...and is it OK that I point out that I do not use stock photos in my listings like a competitor does?

I don't see why it wouldn't be OK to point out it's not a stock photo, I do this, it is part of my "boiler plate" for every listing.

The item in the photo is the exact item you will receive - stock photos are never used in any of my auctions.

You certainly do not want to mention any competitor by name, that would be a policy violation.  If you mention competitors in general, I think that's fair, but eBay could think (they could think anything of course, they're eBay) that is saying something "negative" that would "discourage eBay buyers". 

Also, can you call something new if it has been altered??

Common sense says you can.  In eBay lingo, I think that would be "New-Other".  Here are a couple of links that won't really answer your question very well:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/item-description.html

http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/search-manipulation.html  (see Item Condition section)

You'll want to watch out for whatever definitions eBay shows buyers for "New" though.  If they include the proviso "An unused item in original condition...", then maybe not.

There may be other rules or policy pages, they're hard to find.  For example, my category has a specific policy page that prohibits stock photos.  However most of eBay's big favorite sellers in the category use them extensively, and eBay policy enforcers have said (in the past, when such people existed and could be reached) it would be "impractical" to require these sellers to photograph unique individual items.

I play by the rules and wonder why others do not have to.

The rules here are difficult to find, difficult to understand, and often contradict other rules.  Rules without enforcement are pretty useless, and eBay has a lot of those.  eBay also has provisos in their UA that pretty much say "we can ignore our own policy requirements..." for certain sellers if it makes business sense to do so.  It even allows them to arbitrarily claim sellers are "Top Rated" even if they do not meet the requirements. 

If sellers are violating the rules, you can report their listings.  Recent history suggests the chances eBay will do anything are low.  Yet, if your listings are reported, you'll probably hear about it. 

[d-k_treasures]

You mean like TRU being allowed to have a link to their own website in their listings?