I had several listings removed this morning due to VeRO policy violations, specifically, not being able to ship a particular product to EU and other international locations. I immediately revised the remaining listings after the initial removals. 2 hours later, VeRO STILL removed the listings that I had already revised. I then received a 3rd email that if I violated policy again...blah blah blah.
I got one of these today for an OPI product. A few weeks ago the same thing happened for all my Clarins items.
I haven't relisted anything but I have been playing around with the idea of relisting them without International shipping.
I have tried to do research, but you hear some people saying do not relist at all and other people saying it would be fine to relist as long as you're not shipping internationally.
To be clear these are for the same parallel import policy vero (nothing to do with counterfeit).
If a seller doesn't know what they are doing is not in compliance, then give sellers time to adjust their listings. Don't just send them warning after warning within a 2 hour timeframe.
Here's another thing that many sellers might not know. These violations can also be retroactive as long as the listing is still visible on the internet. For example, you sold something that's LV brand 2 months ago and someone bought it. LV can still find your listing and file a VERO violation notice to ebay, thus giving you one "strike". In that notice ebay will say something like "listings that don't follow this policy in the future will result in (penalty#2)." A week passes and LV finds another item you sold a month ago that they file another VERO violation notice. That listing was actually sold before you even got the first Vero, but ebay doesn't care. You'll still get that penalty#2 because according to ebay "that listing is still available on the internet and in violation." You did nothing and actually complied since your first violation but still can get hit for a second for something you did retroactively. How do I know? Personal experience.
Well no matter if it's not a case of counterfeit or intellectual rights if VeRO had it removed you best not make changes and relist it unless the rights owner faxes eBay and says you can relist it. If I'm wrong I'd like one of the community blues to tell me I'm wrong.
That's really good to know. What's funny, in my case, is that the items would probably never be purchased internationally because they are so cheap! I guess I dodged a bullet this time 😊.
Let me just say I don't care who or what THE BEST ANSWER IS.
I do know if an item is removed you best not relist it unless eBay says you can.
BOTS can't read details. A bot can find an item that was removed and remove it again which can result in an automattic suspension, and if that happens it could be bye bye birdie for you.
eBay argued that an owner of a trademark, such as L’Oréal is not entitled to that right when the goods bearing its trademark are located in a third State and will not necessarily be forwarded to the territory covered by the trademark in question. L’Oréal, on the other hand, contended that the right to prevent the sale of its goods are triggered as soon as it is clear that offer for sale is targeted at consumers within the EU zone, even if the trademark products are located in a third State. The Court made it clear that “the mere fact that a website is accessible from the territory covered by the trademark is not a sufficient basis for concluding that the offers for sale displayed there are targeted at consumers in that territory.” [para. 64] The Court indeed ruled that it is for the national court to assess a particular offer for sale in order to identify sufficient facts evidencing that the transaction was targeted at consumers in the territory, including the geographic area to which the seller is willing to ship the product.
Here is an email I Sent to the CEO and COO of Corsearch and Nicholas Woodman, CEO of GoPro. Of course no response from any of these CEO’s. True cowards.
Dear PointerBP, Corsearch and GoPro,
Please explain to me how my GoPro listing constituters trademark infringement and provide me with the trademark number filed with the USA Trademark Office and the corresponding trademark number filed with the EEA trademark office or filed with each EU country. Also, provide me with an eBay order number where you made a test purchase and actually had the GoPro item delivered within a EU country. In the USA, I am protected by the “Right of First Sale Doctrine”. A shipment does not become a parallel import until it actually crosses into the EU country of destination. Even if the goods are authentic and genuine product, the EU Customs are not going to confiscate the product unless they are counterfeit. Genuine and authentic products will flow thru to the destination address and it is up to the trademark owner whether or not the mark owner wants to refuse the product and not allow it into the EU country. Parallel imports is also a concept which applies to trade between the EEA countries. Just because my listing offers worldwide shipping thru eBay does not mean my listing is targeting a specific EU country, therefore no trademark infringement has occurred. It is also the rights holder’s duty and obligation to prove they have the respective trademark registered with the EEA trademark office or within each EU country before they can enforce and rights or take any legal action.
PointerBP and Corsearch don’t even have jurisdiction in the Netherlands to bring litigation against me. Jurisdictionn would fall within the state of Texas within the US because the bulk of my contacts are in Texas and eBay is a US based company. PointerBP filing a VERO with eBay also establishes jurisdiction in the US because PointerBP knows eBay will send notice to me in the forum state of Texas and I will be harmed in the State of Texas.
My listing needs to be reinstated and eBay needs to be told to remove the black mark from my account as there is no evidence or proof of me actually shipping this GoPro item into the EU. This is simply a matter of a cyber cop scouring the Internet and removing unauthorized seller listings so the cyber cop company can pad their billings to their client and fatten their wallet. A serious trademark owner would issue me a cease and desist letter followed by possible litigation if I did not comply and if they are really serious about enforcing their trademark. If this mater is not handled in a timely manner, I will pursue legal action thru legal counsel against both PointerBP, Corsearch and GoPro. It is well known amongst eBay sellers the underhanded, unethical, fraudulent, deceptive and malicious actions Corsearch engages against small eBay sellers and sellers on other platforms, such as Etsy, Shopify and Amazon. I am working to file a class action lawsuit against Corsearch and all Corsearch entities and subsidiaries for Corsearches unethical business practices and daily violations of the DMCA, First Sale Doctrine, trademark law and making false counterfeit claims against sellers. Corsearch is the #1 violator and abuser of the eBay VERO system.
eBay argued that an owner of a trademark, such as L’Oréal is not entitled to that right when the goods bearing its trademark are located in a third State and will not necessarily be forwarded to the territory covered by the trademark in question. L’Oréal, on the other hand, contended that the right to prevent the sale of its goods are triggered as soon as it is clear that offer for sale is targeted at consumers within the EU zone, even if the trademark products are located in a third State. The Court made it clear that “the mere fact that a website is accessible from the territory covered by the trademark is not a sufficient basis for concluding that the offers for sale displayed there are targeted at consumers in that territory.” [para. 64] The Court indeed ruled that it is for the national court to assess a particular offer for sale in order to identify sufficient facts evidencing that the transaction was targeted at consumers in the territory, including the geographic area to which the seller is willing to ship the product.
albertabrightalberta
