posted on July 21, 2004 02:00:57 AM new
Hi All,
I just read about this in TAG notes. It immediately caught my attention because of the grief that "Shabby Chic" seems to cause. Apparently VeRO doesn't always win.
http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/trademarks.html
What are your thoughts on this?
Regards,
Adrian
posted on July 21, 2004 02:11:45 AM new
They have turned this into a cottage industry. These corporate lawyers try to sit on the little guys and come away with a sore ass. At least when it concerns vero and what you can and can't do. They figure they own the whole ball of wax and find out their interpretation of their 'rights' wither when brought before the bar. It's mildly amusing and hopefully the corporations that like to rewrite and abuse copyright laws will take pause.
posted on July 21, 2004 03:27:27 AM new
Karen Dudnikov is the eBay seller who owns that site. She and her husband have taken on corporate giants over trademark issues and have won repeatedly against Warner brothers, Disney, Major League Baseball and more.
Yes, she gets VERO'd, but she successfully fights back and gets her auctions reinstated. But who wants to spend so much time battling in court? I'd rather spend my money and time sipping a cool one on the beach!
Yes, the same companies she won against will still likley VERO the rest of us. They'll probably just eventually leave her alone. Maybe I'm just jaded!
There has been discussion on this in the past, but I don't have the links.
posted on July 21, 2004 04:26:53 AM new
It's probably not worth the fight. You have to jump through hoops for eBay. Then you have those out there who are selling "Tiffany" lamps that are clearly not Tiffany and getting away with it. Sometimes I think they pick and choose. I know that Tiffany is coming down on those selling so-called Tiffany jewelry, but it seems you can still call your lamp a Tiffany even if it is not. The lamps being sold are beautiful, BTW, they just shouldn't use Tiffany in the title. Very misleading.
I was VeRO'd twice. Unfortunately, one was an innocent mistake and the second was a wrongful VeRO. I just took the hits and moved on. Hermes is the worse! One tip I did get from an auction board somewhere was that the VeRO members generally search the titles and not the auction descriptions. Adding an * at the end of the brand name in the title or deliberately mispelling the brand name will pretty much keep them at bay. You can also run words together: i.e., Antiquetiffany. However, it doesn't help in bidder's searches, which more often than not is the reason for using the brand names in the first place.
The shabby chic thing is just plain stupid. However, doing a search on shabby chic produces: shabby & chic, shabby/chic, shabby ______ chic, etc. BTW, there are auctions running using "shabby chic".
Cheryl
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
posted on July 21, 2004 06:49:20 AM new
I have had one of the movies I sell on ebay taken off, but called and threatened them with a lawsuit. iwas able to relist it again with no problem. What makes the entire thing so stupid is it was a movie I made anyway and I OWN the copyright!! These corporations and lawyers are scum and need to be shut down for good.
posted on July 21, 2004 07:16:04 AM new
Very interesting!
Meadowlark - maybe Karen Dudnikov makes more suing than selling. Either way I think I have to admire her for standing up.
I've been pulled one time by VeRo and it really pissed me off but I didn't do anything about it. I'm sure I lost money too
posted on July 21, 2004 09:43:47 AM newBut who wants to spend so much time battling in court?
What time in court ? All they did was compose and mail out legal complaints.
Two of the settlements paid out a total of $1500, another is secret, and who knows how much more they have won.
Now that they're experienced "lawyers" pro se, they propably spend less time on their legal work so the settlements may be getting pretty profitable for them.
