Epson - Removal of eBay listing

techspec

vikingaero wrote: »

So in theory nothing branded could ever be sold on The FleaBay?

I can't advertise my Vauxhall Corsa, nor my Acer laptop, nor my Next chuddies. So the only thing I could sell is something like:

"Folded Paper Aeroplance crafted personally by me from non-branded paper..."

Don't really get your point. The ink was not genuine.

So unless you know where to get vauxhall corsa copies - i don't really see how that compares.

Of course, if you were to sell copy vauxhall parts made by 5 year olds in China - then thats different.

mr_sharma

Leo2020 wrote: »

Basically a company could request the removal of an item for any reason they like as long as they tell eBay it's because someone has infringed intellectual property rights.

That appears to be the case (if they're enrolled in their VERO program which is undermined by their concession that they're not experts in the rights of third parties).

Helix

Leo2020 wrote: »

I found this from someone else who had a listing removed plus the response they got from Epson:

http://reviews.ebay.ca/My-listing-removed-by-eBay-VeRO-Poor-Policy-Compliance?ugid=10000000007809898

The important bit is here:

"The guidelines for posting an auction for Epson ink cartridges is as follows:

The auction title must contain one of the following terms to clearly identify the product.
1) compatible
2) non-genuine
3) non-OEM
4) genuine

The words "comp" or "compat" or "4" are not acceptable within the title. Also, make sure if you use a thumbnail photo in the description closely matches the auction title. For example, if you are selling genuine Epson cartridges, make sure the photo depicted is an Epson (genuine) ink product, not a compatible. If you are selling a compatible ink cartridge, make sure you are not using a photo of a genuine Epson ink cartridge."

According to this I followed all the rules given by Epson.

I know that I am like a dog with a bone with this but it's just irritated me.

That is on eBay Canada though, most electronics companies have separate European divisions that might have different rules. Why don't you just wait for a reply from Epson.

Leo2020

I am waiting for a response from Epson but there is nothing wrong with looking at other similar cases to mine - well in my opinion anyway.

I know it is from Canada but I would have thought that as it is a trademark issue the rules around the world would be the same or similar. But as you say I will have to wait and see what Epson say.

Leo2020

Still not received a response from Epson, I have contacted eBay again and advised them that I have not received a response.

Leo2020

eBay's response:

"Hello ******,

Thanks for getting back to us regarding the removal of your Cartridges listing. I'm Megan and I'm pleased to assist you further in this matter.
I appreciate that you have contacted Epson Deutschland GmbH in this matter and I'm sorry to hear that you haven't received a reply from them.

******, I've emailed the rights owner to ask them to reply to you as soon as possible. Again, please remember that while we actively encourage rights owners to communicate with our members, we can't force them to contact you. If they don't contact you after we take these steps please understand that we won't be able to facilitate any further. We'd suggest not to relist the item until the matter si clarified with the rights owner as further removal may negatively impact your account.

We appreciate your patience and understanding in this matter.

Kind regards,
Megan Vickers
eBay VeRO Team"

So if Epson don't get back to me I can't re-list them. I really hope Epson get back to me because I think this whole situation is a bit silly and all I want is for them to tell me what I can/can't say if I re-list the cartridges.

Andy_L

Leo2020 wrote: »

I found this from someone else who had a listing removed plus the response they got from Epson:

http://reviews.ebay.ca/My-listing-removed-by-eBay-VeRO-Poor-Policy-Compliance?ugid=10000000007809898

The important bit is here:

"The guidelines for posting an auction for Epson ink cartridges is as follows:

The auction title must contain one of the following terms to clearly identify the product.
1) compatible
2) non-genuine
3) non-OEM
4) genuine

The words "comp" or "compat" or "4" are not acceptable within the title. Also, make sure if you use a thumbnail photo in the description closely matches the auction title. For example, if you are selling genuine Epson cartridges, make sure the photo depicted is an Epson (genuine) ink product, not a compatible. If you are selling a compatible ink cartridge, make sure you are not using a photo of a genuine Epson ink cartridge."

According to this I followed all the rules given by Epson.

I know that I am like a dog with a bone with this but it's just irritated me.

Possibly the problem is that you said these are "compatible not genuine Epson cartridges" thus from the point of view of search engines that would show up in a search for "genuine Epson cartridges" and thus an automatic process kicked off

Leo2020

I could have used the term non-genuine, but after the listing was deleted I could no longer view it. I'm describing my listing from memory.

Search engines will pick up on the word genuine from non-genuine and not genuine.

The process isn't automatic, Epson had to report my listing for it to be removed. eBay don't delete listings that are potentially in breach of trademarks, the manufacturer themselves has to report it to them.

Any how it's no good guessing really, Epson could have requested it's removal for any number of reasons. It's just a case of me waiting until I get a response, if I get a response at all.

Leo2020

First response from Epson, finally received today:

"In return to your emails you have received already a bunch of information explaining why your listing was reported as TM infringing.

Indeed, your listing was reported as it was showing inconstancies: The product image used in your listing was not showing an Original Epson ink cartridge, but a cartridge which was not manufactured by the Seiko Epson Corp. – so a generic one.

The image you’ve used was also not marked as a stock photo – obviously it was showing the product you’ve offered (a non-Epson ink cartridge).

In the product description you’ve indicated in addition in section MPN: ‘T0712 compatible’ a clear indication that the offered ink cartridge is not a genuine Epson product.

Based on both indications (product image and MPN) it became clear that a non-Epson product was offered as an original Epson one – a clear TM infringement which in consequence was reported to eBay accordingly.

Please be so kind to use proper indications in the product description and images of the product you want to sell only for your listings in future.

Hope this helps.

Kind regards,
Bodo Bredahl
Attorney at law
for the Epson Legal Enforcement Team"

My response was:

"Dear Bodo Bredahl,

This is the first email I have received from you and I have not received a "bunch of information". Just very generic information from eBay of why it might have been removed but not a definite answer.

I would like to raise a few points.

I was selling compatible cartridges and I described it as such. I said in the listing that it was a compatible cartridge and I also mentioned in the title. So I am a little confused on what I should be saying? Could you please clarify?

In regards to the photo, what do you mean by marking it as a stock photo? I used a photo I had taken myself, not a stock one, so how should it be marked exactly?"

Leo2020

Second response from Epson:

Each time your sending an email to this email address you’re receiving a reply as follows: ‘eBay Sellers: Why was my auction shut down?’

The information provided in this document is covering your questions already as well.

The title (header) of your listing was TM infringing – let me refer to the provided general information please – it lacked the legally required clear-without-doubt differentiation to the used TM Epson and the products sold under this brand.

As products offered are NOT manufactured by the Seiko Epson Corp. (Epson), but the wording of the header created the factual wrong impression towards the customer that Original Epson ink cartridges would be offered.

Please note that according to the actual TM jurisdiction the crystal-clear differentiation to the used OEM brand (as Epson here) has to take place from the very beginning – so with the header – already. Any clarification re. the real origin of the offered product (real manufacturer or brand) shall not fix the already constituted TM infringement.

As said before your listing constituted an unfair usage of the Epson TM, its reputation and for this reason a TM infringement was given.

Hope this helps.

Kind regards,

Bodo Bredahl
Attorney at law
for the Epson Legal Enforcement Team"

My response:

"I have not received any document - maybe this is the problem?"