eBay Launches “Call for Action” Campaign in Europe

sandiOn 06.25.2008 at 1:49 pm Said:

This post made me laugh.

Why not instead of trying to change laws for ebay’s benfit, they do what they should be doing anyway - policing their own site,

So what in essence ebay proved with this is that they are not concerned about cleaning up their site.

Come on, survey after survey shows when asked what adjectives they would use to describe ebay - counterfeits is on every single list.

The laws do not need to change, ebay needs to change.

Hani DurzyOn 06.25.2008 at 3:05 pm Said:

Full disclosure here — I’m the former Director of Corporate Communications for eBay Inc., until this past February (I’m no longer at eBay). So obviously, I have a certain point of view. But, I still care what’s going on over there. And having been on the front lines for so long in the discussion about counterfeits on eBay, I can say that this is a smart move by the company - one that is a tremendous show of support for eBay buyers *and* sellers.

Of course, counterfeits appearing on eBay are a real issue, as they have been throughout the world for long before eBay, or the Internet, was a glimmer in the eye. eBay didn’t create this problem, and it hasn’t perfected solving the problem, but it has made great progress. The same cannot be said for thousands of other e-commerce sites (or sidewalks, bazaars, or pawn shops, for that matter.)

But, for too long, manufacturers and retailers have been crying “counterfeit” or “trademark violation”, when the real intention was to protect their own businesses and distribution channels. The Internet, and eBay in particular, creates opportunities for sellers to build businesses offering legitimate products, and for buyers to get great deals on those products. That power in the hands of regular people and small businesses is seen as a real threat by these giant entrenched conglomerates. Those conglomerates have a major say in policymaking. And many existing regulations, including those in the EU, have the effect of further advantaging big business at the expense of eBay sellers, and online shoppers everywhere.

Make no mistake — the future of the Internet, of small business growth, and of online shopping very much rests on the ability of huge, threatened business interests to ensure that policies are in place which limit the freedom and opportunity that comes from transparent online commerce.

In my opinion, it’s very encouraging to see eBay leading the fight to protect peoples’ ability to buy and sell online. So, to address Sandi’s point above — yes, eBay needs to continue to change and get better at keeping the site clean. But, yes, certain laws need to change as well - or else the people who buy and sell on eBay and other sites will continue to be disadvantaged.

MechelleOn 06.25.2008 at 3:49 pm Said:

@Hani Durzi

First- I believe these manufactures have the right to protect their product and reputation.

I also believe eBay is negligent in combating counterfeit products in the marketplace. If eBay doesn’t feel as though they need to make efforts for the manufacturers they should be doing so for eBay members. eBay continuously requests and encourages sellers to report policy violations (well most often focused on excessive shipping fees) but when we do (I do) they completely ignore the clear criminal behavior. I don’t understand 1- why they want us to waste our time reporting these activities if they really don’t give a damn? and 2- why they don’t care enough about their members to protect them from this theft and acknowledge this is in fact the real reason buyers leave and do not return?

For you and eBay to suggest the motive for this action is anything other than self-interest is a bit much. eBay is currently pursuing anti-competitive immunity in Australia to enforce the use of PayPal only in the name of consumer protection. Knowing with absolute certainty that the paypal only rule will result in increased costs across the board to both buyers and sellers in eBay Australia. The idea that eBay is only motivated to protect consumers is absurd. Even if this rule protected the 1% of victims of fraud and theft among eBay Australia it does not makeup the difference that consumers will lose in fees having to use paypal. Clearly Paypal only does greater harm to consumers as a whole in Australia than letting people choose the payment method they prefer. If the claim is genuine than maybe Paypal should offer their service at no cost to sellers.

ur_bringing_me_downOn 06.25.2008 at 3:53 pm Said:

I couldn’t agree more with Hani Durzy. Ebay is at least trying and totally headed in the right direction on this.

Hani DurzyOn 06.25.2008 at 4:11 pm Said:

@mechelle

In no way am I suggesting that eBay’s actions here aren’t governed by self-interest. On the contrary, it’s these types of backward-facing, pre-ecommerce, restrictive regulations that strike at the very heart of eBay’s business model. Otherwise, why else would they be motivated to take the lead here?

That said, this isn’t a zero-sum game. eBay doesn’t make a dime if people like you don’t buy and sell on the site. Interests are aligned. So, both eBay and the hundreds of millions of people who buy and sell online have a vested interest in making sure that entrenched, old-school conglomerates aren’t unilaterally influencing policies that will benefit only them at the expense of the growth of e-commerce, which benefits many more people. This fundamentally is a “people vs. powerful” debate. I know which side I want to be on.

implogOn 06.25.2008 at 4:46 pm Said:

Hi Hani:

Can you tell us a little more about eBay’s Corporate Communications and what is rewarded within the department?

I ask because of a couple puzzling incidents involving current eBay Corporate Communications execs.

Usher Lieberman came to this blog in its early days. He identified himself as an eBay corporate spokesman then announced he was not writing about eBay as an eBay corporate spokesman even though he is an eBay corporate spokesman and was writing about eBay. I was confused by this. How can that be?

Mr. Lieberman later contradicted eBay CEO John Donahoe in an interview with a British newspaper. His now infamous quote about vocal sellers being routed off the site was in stark contrast to Mr.Donahoe’s statement that eBay welcomed the dissenting opinions of members and as Donahoe said on this blog, “I really care a lot about listening to the community. I care a lot about being customer focused.”

Usher Lieberman told Guardian.co.uk, that there is no place on eBay for sellers who do not give buyers exceptional customer service and the “vocal minority’ who are unhappy “will be routed off” the site. “We have set the bar high,” he admitted.

Additionally, an eBay Corporate Communications exec, Jose Mallabo, was busted by Auctionbytes David Steiner for posting an auctionbytes.com attack on Ina Steiner under a false name for her post that was critical of eBay. David Steiner responded angrily that Mallabo’s deception resulted in burned bridges with Auctionbytes.

My question is, how can eBay employ Corporate Communications executives so flawed?

Was it OK to launch online attacks on those who criticized eBay using sock puppet IDs when you were there? Was it OK for a Communications exec to contradict the CEO when you were there? What happened to Shannon Stubo?

Your answers may help some of us understand eBay’s current corporate culture and plan for our futures.

Thanks in advance and best of luck to you.

MechelleOn 06.25.2008 at 5:30 pm Said:

@Hani Durzy

This issue probably does need to be addressed, however my best interest and eBay’s (though they don’t seem to recognize this reality) is best served by cleaning up the marketplace. Getting rid of the counterfeit products that degrade the eBay brand and me as someone who sells on eBay. Making this issue a priority would substantially increase eBay’s credibility (again mine as well) and in effect increase participation in the eBay marketplace.

The current focus of weeding out “bad sellers” who over charge shipping is wasted effort, because no matter how many times they repeat this is the reason for stagnate or decreased active membership it is much further down the list than the fraud that is rampant within eBay. Maybe it is impossible to accomplish 100% eradication of fraud, but they should be focusing a lot more effort into this task than they are at this time.

TonyOn 06.25.2008 at 5:35 pm Said:

The European Union is a complicated beast, so good luck with this but I do find it ironic that ebay, who are trying to marginalise choice over Paypal in both Europe and Australia are at the forefront of a campaign like this.

sandiOn 06.25.2008 at 7:05 pm Said:

but I do find it ironic that ebay, who are trying to marginalise choice over Paypal in both Europe and Australia are at the forefront of a campaign like this.

and let’s not forget it is ebay being sued, sued and sued in European courts regarding counterfeits - and consistently losing:-). I’d want the laws changed too if I were ebay.

I guess enhancing the buyer experience is only applicable when it doesn’t cost ebay anything.

Hani DurzyOn 06.25.2008 at 8:19 pm Said:

@mechelle

Fair enough. I understand your point, and I’m in no position to tell you what your best interests should be. You aren’t the only one who wants to get rid of any and all counterfeits off the site, and that long list includes those that work at eBay.

But, two things that I hope people can keep in mind:

First, eBay already does a ton of work to get rid of counterfeits, when they are made aware of them. And if you don’t believe me, then hop over to the discussion boards and look at all the threads complaining about listings being taken down because of VeRO complaints. Thousands of manufacturers work with eBay to keep illegitimate items off the site. What alot of people don’t realize is that eBay is under legal obligation to take a listing down when it receives a VeRO filing. There is no choice here, as my (very) limited legal understanding tells me.

Second, this fundamentally isn’t about counterfeits. Counterfeits have been an issue for as long as people have paid money for things. As far as I know, there is absolutely no conclusive evidence that e-commerce, or eBay, have had any appreciable impact on counterfeit production. Manufacturers and retailers know this — they’ve dealt with it for years. What this is really about is their continued effort to dictate everything about the sale of their products, to your detriment. This is about buying a pack of batteries at a drugstore and seeing a sticker on the back that says “Not For Resale.” Really? I just paid for them. They’re mine. I should be able to do what I want with them. This is about retail clothing stores “profiling” buyers of lots of items, making snap judgements about whether they might be buying to resell on eBay, and refusing to sell to them. This is about manufacturers not wanting a person in the UK to by something in the US that isn’t available in his own country yet (because of their own distribution plans), so making it illegal to sell it.

Counterfeits are bad, we all agree. More can be done to prevent their sale on eBay, surely. But this is something different, and something a little more insidious and frightening. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, these regulations are a concerted effort to strangle e-commerce in its sleep.

Patricia1On 06.25.2008 at 8:33 pm Said:

Here’s something a little closer to home then fake famous brand items being sold on ebay. In 2003 & 2004 I belonged to Arts Community Watch. We were a group of mostly artists with some knowledge of the field and we policed the arts categories and reported fraudulent listings. It was great at first and we each dove headlong into it feeling we would make a difference - we were happy to attend the bi-weekly phone meetings and give our reports. Well…after reporting basically the same big sellers over and over again, we started to become disillusioned and dropped out one at a time. I have no idea if they still have these community watch teams. Yeah…we reported some small sellers and they were punished and brought into line…but the big sellers who sold phony Picassos and Dali’s, etc. were basically untouchable! I haven’t looked in a long time but they’re probably still chugging out those phonies! Who is going to get rid of a seller who has hundreds of listings going for sometimes several thousand apiece? I learned real quick that this watch team business was simply window dressing. Just a point they can make: “we have teams of ebay members patrolling the category for fraud”. But basically NO BITE. In the end, our arts category manager said we probably couldn’t do anything to the “big sellers” because they have “advocates” at ebay who help them with their listings and problems! I did not delve any further into it - feeling it was really none of my business so I simply left. I’m only relaying what the arts manager told us. Ebay has had plenty of opportunities to stamp out the worst fraud. Frankly, they’ve simply been ignoring it for years - which leaves me to believe you can’t leave the fox in charge of the henhouse Fraud on ebay had to be handled by an outside organization - the same way their boards are handled by someone else. A place where users could report fraud and have it looked at! Its a big job but if ebay wants its reputation back that’s a great place to start.

AmberOn 06.25.2008 at 9:01 pm Said:

The VeRO program is fatally flawed and we all know it.

There are no human beings that actually review the complaints. Several VeRO members (Monster Cables comes to mind) report any and all auctions that offer their items for resale. These items aren’t counterfeit, do not violate copyright/trademark etc. They are simply a case of a buyer reselling an original purchase. In the case of books and copyright issues, that is protected under the First Sale Doctrine here in the US. ALL merchandise should fall under the same protection.

I agree that the protectionist actions especially in the EU are harmful. They deny access to merchandise and result in higher prices due to a lack of competition. The irony here is that eBay, the biggest goon out there in terms of protecting its market share (Paypal only in AU anyone?) is the one leading the fight.

Most of us would love to see more open markets. But eBay needs to follow up on member reports and police the VeRO program. Make sure that counterfeit items are removed and legitimate items are allowed to be sold.

No one likes a hypocrite, and that is exactly what eBay appears to be. It’s ok for them to be anti-competitive, but they can lament the same practices elsewhere.

MechelleOn 06.25.2008 at 10:27 pm Said:

@Hani Durzy

I recall reading an Article late last summer to early fall about Lancome going after some eBay sellers who had sold some products internationally. I believe they were “caught” because the products where never released to other international markets. I think the legal issue was came about due to the products being sold internationally - Domestically the manufacturer had no authority to interfere in the sales, but once it was sent out of the country legal rights for the eBay sellers were absent. I assume it is these situations that you are referring to??

I shop at a couple of stores that actually have a max purchase amount of $500.00. It was stunning to shop at a store and be told I was buying to much LOL. That is definitely an out of the ordinary shopping experience! Of course the reason is to limit resale- I say limit because a 500 dollar cap for product ranging from 3 to 10 dollars can definitely get you a good amount of items to make the trip well worth taking.

I understand the point you are making and the problem with the situation. When I read that article last year it definitely struck me as wrong. I do think that eBay is a useful platform for selling counterfeit products and I think that is why they are taking so much heat on the issue. I really think if eBay worked just a tad harder on getting rid of these thieves it might calm the nerves of some of these manufacturers a bit. Maybe not, but it cannot be denied that eBay has drawn particular attention from these companies and there is a reason.

My particular peeve about the counterfeit products are the cosmetics. I believe selling fraudulent cosmetics is very dangerous along with the theft of the members money. There are specific clear examples of fake Mac Cosmetics being sold - I have reported these listings numerous times only to watch them sell to some trusting eBay member- the kind that don’t come back after they realize they were just ripped off. There are rules against selling used cosmetics (I report these also and yet they stay live until auction close too) I assume the policy is a safety issue I think the same consideration with greater ferocity should be applied to selling fake cosmetics, because they are easily more dangerous than a used real cosmetic (not that I would use one and it stuns me what people will buy and sell). We don’t know what is in the shadow pots being sold as Mac eye shadow so clearly there is no way to know if the product is putting the trusting eBay member’s face in harms way. The same can be said of fake fragrances- I do believe that it is now against policy to sell the product after it has been poured into separate smaller bottles- so that is good- I think it reduces the likelihood of someone misting their self with acid or something similarly dangerous.

These fake Mac product sellers are easy to pick out- very easy. As a matter of fact if eBay would ban sales of cosmetics from Asian sellers- specifically from China and Thailand- 99% of this issue would go away. That is all they would have to do ban them from the health and beauty category- simple program setting- these sellers also deal fake Lancome Glosses but not at the same frequency.

A fake purse, (sorry Patricia) fake painting, clothing …. though these are terrible in that they rob people of money- the cosmetics are a danger to the health of the member and should be the highest priority in combating counterfeit products in my opinion.

sandiOn 06.26.2008 at 1:47 am Said:

First, eBay already does a ton of work to get rid of counterfeits

No, manufacturers and ebay users do a ton of work - ebay doesn’t do much.

when they are made aware of them. And if you don’t believe me, then hop over to the discussion boards and look at all the threads complaining about listings being taken down because of VeRO complaints.

Right, manufacturers now keep full time staff whose enbtire job is to check ebay auctions. I suppose the spin on that one is ebay helps increase the employment rate?

And if it is NOT the actual Vero member, listings remain.

Thousands of manufacturers work with eBay to keep illegitimate items off the site.

Most of those manufacturers state ebay isn’t all that easy to work with, many of taken ebay to court over the lack of ebay’s responsiveness.

What alot of people don’t realize is that eBay is under legal obligation to take a listing down when it receives a VeRO filing. There is no choice here, as my (very) limited legal understanding tells me.

Again, ebay exdpects others to police their site.

Second, this fundamentally isn’t about counterfeits. Counterfeits have been an issue for as long as people have paid money for things. As far as I know, there is absolutely no conclusive evidence that e-commerce, or eBay, have had any appreciable impact on counterfeit production. Manufacturers and retailers know this — they’ve dealt with it for years.

That was said tongue in cheek, right?

One no longer has to go to a street corner in New York to buy that “rolex” watch. One no longer has to go to the alley in Chicago and get the Prada out of the trunk store front.

Ebay made it easier for all the Chinese counterfeiters, ebay gave them a global marketplace.

What this is really about is their continued effort to dictate everything about the sale of their products, to your detriment.

Ok, a manufacturer has a choice, have no guidelines and then hire enough employes to monitor ebay listings for fakes - or they can simply ban their products from being sold on ebay - making it easy to report auctions. As a business person which would you do? Heck we all know which road ebay itself would take.

The European courts keep fining ebay and telling them they are not doing enough. With all the changes ebay has made in the last 6 months, not once have they addressed the REAL issues of the site. Trying to change laws which enable ebay to keep doing business as usual is seen for what it is, nothing more.

Patricia1On 06.26.2008 at 8:24 am Said:

“With all the changes ebay has made in the last 6 months, not once have they addressed the REAL issues of the site. Trying to change laws which enable ebay to keep doing business as usual is seen for what it is, nothing more.”

Let’s face it - what they have done so far is pretty much for their own good and not for the good of the buyers. They’re bent on changing their business model to Amazon’s and that has little to do with checking fraud and scams on the site. What they have done so far doesn’t bring one buyer back or lure in one new buyer. Fakes are still as rampant as ever.