cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

I repeatedly have listings removed for items I have legally purchased and am reselling.  I buy various items at a lower cost and then resell them at a slightly higher price.  This is how I am attempting to make money.

I have the right to resell items I have legally purchased on the "First Sale Doctrine," but I'll have a listing removed from time to time, still claiming "Copyright infringement." 

It does no good contacting vero@ebay.com or the email that made the false claim against my listing.  I just get a canned response with no accurate information.  

My listing is just removed, and I am threatened about my account being closed if I relist.

Can we, as sellers, take no legal action in defense of our right to resell?  Does eBay not defend the sellers? 

 

Is eBay just a lost cause?

 

 

Message 1 of 62
latest reply
61 REPLIES 61

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

I am sorry to hear that many sellers here are uninformed of the "Sellers Rights" and the "First Sale Doctrine."


Copyright holders can control the initial distribution of their copyrighted work, their right to control distribution ends once the time is sold. In other words, their rights are exhausted once the physical item is sold.  The first purchaser may resell the item for a profit, give it away for free or destroy it, and absent any contractual agreement with the purchaser, the copyright holder has no control of these actions.

Once a physical item is sold, the intellectual property holder loses the right to control distribution or resell the physical item.  This is known as the "First Sale Doctrine" in the United States and the "exhaustion of rights" doctrine internationally because once the time is sold, the IP holder has no more rights over the item.

Ninth Circuit: First Sale Doctrine Safe Haven for Resellers of End Products Incorporating Trademarked Products

"Resellers can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that the first sale doctrine defense is here to stay. The Ninth Circuit recently ruled in favor of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, holding that its use of the Bluetooth name in its vehicle and product mailings falls within the confines of the first sale doctrine. The ruling in Bluetooth SIG Inc. v. FCA US LLC establishes a clearer precedent for new end products incorporating marks resulting from an authorized sale. "

https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2022/05/first-sale-doctrine-for-resellers-of-end-produ...


All I am saying is that we need to band together and defend or rights; WE are being infringed upon.

 

Message 16 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

I am more than familiar with the First Sale Doctrine.  I am familiar with the case you cite, as well, and I am familiar with it in some details.   That case has no bearing on your practice of buying new items for resale, and it does not protect you in doing so.  You may wish to study retain arbitrage more thoroughly, as it is not wide open, you know.

 

-

Message 17 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

It’s ok to continue to bring up the first sale doctrine. If that’s the place you are settled on. 

In reality though, this is eBay’s sandbox. The posters here are trying to help us all understand, historically, what happens in these situations and why it happens. This is not the first post on this matter. It is a regular topic here. 

At first glance, it looks like the items currently listed might be freight damaged, overstock, returns, but nothing bought at retail level that just had no use when it got home. 
eBay is also cracking down on sellers with new product at below retail. Apparently there is a lot of shoplifting and looting happening across the country and small scale sellers with multiple bottles of vitamins and OTC items tend to get noticed. 

 

Side note. I see one item has Apple and android in the title. This is not an Apple product. It is a product that compatible with Apple. 


Message 18 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Actually it DOES pertain to NEW items, ANY item that is purchased the initial IP holder loses rights to control distribution or resale of said item. 
It does not matter if first sale doctrine was written before the internet, that is a moot point as it is STILL a law passed by the Supreme Court.  And it does very much still apply. 
You should check out the case of Tabberone.
For instance if you are not a Authorized reseller for Corvette, Cadillac, Camaro etc. (which I do not see you posting you are an Authorized reseller) then you yourself are in violation of Vero and could get items removed because you are using those names in your listings.
It does not matter if you make an item that "fits" a certain make/model of vehicle, if you mention those copyrighted/trademarked names then you are in violation...PERIOD.
So point being, no one seller is better than another seller when it comes to Vero violation, because ANY item can be flagged under Vero.

Message 19 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy


@dryophelia wrote:

....  At first glance, it looks like the items currently listed might be freight damaged, overstock, returns, but nothing bought at retail level that just had no use when it got home. 


Further, OP said:  "I am building a business using retail arbitrage."  That means he is buying brand new stock from retailers and reselling it on eBay at a mark-up. 

 

That is not a First Sale Doctrine issue, either.   Plus, retail arbitrage has legal limits, too, and those limits do not allow for the purchase and resale of merchandise from brands that have strict policies regarding the resale of their goods.

 

-

Message 20 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Google up Tabberone. She used to sell on ebay and took on all the companies that pulled her Listings. She’s won against Disney, the NFL, Mars etc…. 

Her website has all the information on how to deal with these people. 

The Race is over
The Rats won.
Message 21 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy


@bonjourami wrote:

Owners have the right to protect their intellectual property,by not having sellers to infringe upon those rights by reselling their items..


Only if someone is copying them and selling fakes. If it’s a real item you purchased you have the right to resell it.

 

Tabberone proved that. 

The Race is over
The Rats won.
Message 22 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy


@stainlessenginecovers wrote:

1st Sale Doc does NOT apply to 'new' items- which you are buying to resell. 

 

1st Sale Doc was written before the Internet

 

1st Sale Doc was NOT intended for those to advertise and sell on a publicly accessible website; especially one known for fake/illegal things being listed/sold. 

 

Therefore, this site has the right to say what can be listed and what cannot. 


It absolutely does apply. If you bought it legally and it’s a real product.  Google up Tabberone. She fought all these companies and won. Personally I will bet she made more money in settlements than selling in ebay. 

The Race is over
The Rats won.
Message 23 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

I am dealing with a Vero Unauthorized/Counterfeit Claim right now and the company that Benefit Cosmetics hired will not back down. They are going after me for it being a sample. They are not at all interested in proof I have of where I obtained it. They say they did not claim it was counterfeit (untrue they filed it under Unauthorized/Counterfeit) they reported me because selling "samples/testers is prohibited". I verified with ebay there is absolutely no rule against selling samples. 

 

So this company has admitted that they are not complaining about the same reason they used to file the Vero. That I am just breaking their own company rule about samples. 

 

They refuse to retract it. I dont care about selling the stupid sample but I do care about the derogatory mark on my account, especially because they are abusing the rules.

 

I am not sure what to do next. Maybe.contact e-commerce bytes about it and post on their social media about that what they are doing.

Message 24 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Thank you,  Thank you,  Thank you.

At least someone understands what I am saying.

Message 25 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Exactly! You get the point of the post and understand as I do what OP was trying to say!!

So many others here are so very unaware of all of this and think they know so much but actually have not tried to learn about first sale doctrine or cases which challenge Vero and such and really have no clue. 

Message 26 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy


@maxine*j wrote:

The First Sale Doctrine protects your right to sell something you bought for your personal use and now lo longer want, for one reason or another.  It does not give you the right to buy brand new things for the express purpose of reselling them, which is what you are doing.   The VeRO take-downs are legit.


I do not believe that the first sale doctrine distinguishes between the resale of an item that you purchased and ultimately did not use and an item that you used and then resold.  As long as you legally purchased an item then the first sale doctrine allows one to resell that item.

Message 27 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy


@the_fancy_fox wrote:

Google up Tabberone. She used to sell on ebay and took on all the companies that pulled her Listings. She’s won against Disney, the NFL, Mars etc…. 

Her website has all the information on how to deal with these people. 


But, again, those case(s) have nothing to do with OP's practice.  Dudnikov and Meaders (eBay User-ID Tabberone) argued, successfully, that they were not making counterfeit or replica items, that eBay and others misapplied policies relating to secondary trademark infringement, and so on.  And that was 20 years ago.  All very interesting but inapplicable to OP.

 

-

 

Message 28 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Hallelujah,

 

Thank you for understanding. 

Message 29 of 62
latest reply

Re: Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy

Yes, I understand; this is why I brought up the subject.

 

Is there anything WE as a team can do to control VeRO?

Message 30 of 62
latest reply