Vero violation, so sick of eBay taking listings down when not at fault.

[the_watch_carnival]

Hi. I was reported for Vero violation but the thing is the picture is not even the same. They take listings down and restrict your account for 3 days. You can file an appeal but companies don't even respond or refer you to another dept within who handles this. You submit them the details which takes around 2-3 days making the lifting of restrictions pointless. As you go through this channels your 3 day restriction stands and you're losing money. How is this in any way fair when I am NOT at fault. From what I know brand names hire people in other countries who hire people to look for brand pictures.  I have attached both pics (2nd pic is mine) and clearly my band length is different and also the second hand is near 6 o'clock mark where brand has the hand at 7 o'clock mark. My quality is also not as great as their brand. Not to mention, these violations stay on your account. This is unacceptable. Anyone can suggest something here.

[pikabo-icu]

---

@the_watch_carnival wrote:

That's awful and eBay customer service is so robotic. I hate these call centers being outsourced because a lot of times no matter what you explain them their responses are pretty similar

---

This is true..

I gotta admit though when I first looked at the 2 photos before reading your description of how they differ, I thought they were exactly the same. 

The company likely has a person checking every day or every couple days for this.

A quick glance they do appear to be the same photo.

You can plead your case over on Facebook for business, send a message not just a post on the page. 

I would explain the photos were not the same, how they were different and include the pics.

Tell them you have taken new photos-

Perhaps they can end the restriction early- perhaps not but it's worth a go..

https://www.facebook.com/eBayForBusiness 

[luckythewinner]

eBay is simply conforming to the law that Congress passed. 

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), eBay is not responsible for judging the merits of a Notice of Claimed Infringement. 

In fact if eBay tried to make a ruling on the validity of a VERO claim, they would be exposing themselves to liability under the terms of the DMCA.  

[donsdetour]

---

@luckythewinner wrote:

eBay is simply conforming to the law that Congress passed. 

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), eBay is not responsible for judging the merits of a Notice of Claimed Infringement. 

In fact if eBay tried to make a ruling on the validity of a VERO claim, they would be exposing themselves to liability under the terms of the DMCA.  

---

This is true:

and the why to eBay, VERO members are GOD.

[maxine*j]

---

@the_watch_carnival wrote:

Nope, they block your account so none of your listings are visible for 72 hrs. And if this happens again than its 7 days ban. That is even more worrying for me cause what's them from doing this mistake again and ban me. I have already written to Fossil group who is owner of Diesel copyrights but of course its weekend so no response.

---

Sorry.  I saw clicked on "View Listings" and saw many so I thought all was copacetic again.

=

[chapeau-noir]

---

@jda12121 wrote:

Why would you us a picture that is so obviously so close to theirs and would be construed as an effort to confuse buyers? You had to have done that on purpose. There is a difference between a VERO violation and a violation for unauthorized use of pictures. 

---

That's really reaching.

[farmalljr]

There are many reasons WHY someone can VeRO your listings. Among them are:

You are selling the product as "new" and are not an authorized seller who can honor warranties.

You are using pictures very similar to theirs.

You are using descriptions similar.

You are not an authorized seller of their products. 

You are using copyrighted words, owned by someone else. 

The VeRO owner can fill out whatever reason they want to bounce your listing. So long as you are breaking some kind of rule of theirs, you have NO recourse. Just because you own something, and have it in your hands, does not give you the right to break the rules. 

Welcome to the downside of selling "new" stuff. Some companies are pretty diligent about keeping tabs on their products and who sell them. If you want to continue to sell here, you better start paying attention or you at some point, will get the boot. You are one seller in an ocean of sellers, eBay doesn't care if they have to ban you or not. They see it as it is YOUR job to know the rules and know what toes not to step on. 

As has been suggested, take photos that are NOT similar to the manufacture, and do NOT list them as "new" unless you are authorized to honor the warranties. Sell these watches someplace else, and don't relist them here, or you could be gone. 

[pjcdn2005]

VERO is not for companies to report sellers who are not 'authorized' to sell their products. As mentioned earlier as long as the product is authentic, the seller is authorized to sell it whether it is new or used.  There have been companies that have used VERO to stop ebay sellers from selling their products but they are NOT supposed to use it for that.  

I've never seen a rule on ebay about not selling an item as new unless the seller is authorized to honor the warranty.

[mr_lincoln]

---

@the_watch_carnival wrote:

That's awful and eBay customer service is so robotic. I hate these call centers being outsourced because a lot of times no matter what you explain them their responses are pretty similar

---

@the_watch_carnival   For myself I've never had an issue with either on shore or off shore call centers with eBay ... but then I don't call them very often.  The representatives who answer those calls are the first line of response for eBay and they HAVE to go by the book.  Callers can ask for supervisors or specific departments if it is warranted.  Some other posters here have given some very good responses to the VeRO issue.

When my first item was taken down (and it happened to be an Invicta 1959 Russian Divers watch) I came here and asked about it.  I got some VERY good advice to never try to list it again.  So I didn't, I sold it on another venue for  the same money but fewer fees.  In total I would say the stuff they took down over the years was under $ 150 so that's not too bad.  However, if what they took down for you is your core business then that could be a problem.

I would suggest reading back through some of the replies here and keep in mind the members here ARE trying to help.

[popblox]

---

@mr_lincoln wrote:

@the_watch_carnival    eBay has removed several of my listings over the years and NONE were in violation of Policy.  The system does not work all the time and I suspect it is because computers monitor the site so there is no human expert taking a look at the listings.

---

This has happened to me several times over the years as well, and all the photos were 100% mine. However, there is a (lengthy and complicated) process to fight it. 

@the_watch_carnival 

In the VeRO notice from eBay, you should've also received an email address for the company who filed the complaint. If you want to be able to list the item in question, you're supposed to email the company and plead your case. The company has something like 10 days to reply. Incidentally, I always emailed the company every day, all 10 days - you can never have too much documentation.

If they don't reply, you have to then request a counter notice from VeRO and fill it out perfectly. On one of my cases, I had to put a phrase in all of my listings that said "I verify that I am the rights owner of this item. . .", or something to that effect. It's been a while, so I'm fuzzy on the exact details of the process, just try searching Google for how to fight a VeRO violation - that's how I found it.  

Also, unless something has recently changed, you shouldn't have been banned on a 1st offense - did you relist an item, despite the notice? If you did, I'm not sure if this process will work for you.

[1tuna]

you bring up a good point.........the folks who own these names try to control things to a certain extent

Costco was sued by Omega for selling new Omegas with no factory warranty.

Costco also had probelms with Tiffany diamonds I think.

many of the new watches sold on ebay do not come with a factory warranty

the owners who control the name are aslo trying to control dissapointement with buyers who bought outside an authorised  channel.

a factory warranty fron a big watch name is a plus.much better than a resellers promise

[luckythewinner]

---

@donsdetour wrote:
This is true:

and the why to eBay, VERO members are GOD.

---

They certainly aren't "god" - heck, I am a VERO member and report dozens of listings every year that infringe the music artists I represent. 

But under the DMCA, failing to take down a listing that is reported under the DMCA would expose eBay to legal liability for any infringement by the listing in question. And tking it down protects them from liability. So legally, that makes it a no-brainer for eBay. 

[jonathankirkland]

Why not set the time of your watch to like 3:45 instead of 10:10 exactly like theirs?

[mtgraves7984]

I'm late to this party, but I looked through your recently Sold items. It seems that these 'stock-look' photos only happen with your Diesel watches, the rest are very different looking photos. If Diesel is your problem, that may be your problem. Hmmm...

[farmalljr]

If you believe the mis-information you are spreading, list some PX90 stuff or GoPro stuff new, and see what happens. You CAN'T sell some products as NEW unless you are AUTHORIZED to. If you do, you can be VeRO'ed by the company. 

Believe whatever fairy tale you want. USED and OPEN BOX are different than NEW. New implies you as a seller can back the warranty of the product, which is why you CAN'T sell GoPro branded stuff unless you are authorized. 

[the_watch_carnival]

That is NOT true at all. You're allowed to sell NEW items on eBay. Several sellers do and company CANNOT Vero you for not being AUTHORIZED seller. Heck, in Vero it is not even one of the reasons.