eBay Fined $2.6 Million Over LVMH Sales
December 1, 2009
If a French court has its way, eBay will soon have to fork over $2.6 million. The fine stems from a ban on the sale (or purchase) of LVMH goods, and actually ties to a case that ended in eBay being told to pay LVMH $61 million.
LVMH, which is the entity behind luxury brands like Louis Vuitton, Tag Heuer, and De Beers, won a major case against eBay in June of last year. LVMH claimed to be concerned about the sale of counterfeit merchandise, and eBay was supposed to keep all related items off its French site as a result.
Apparently eBay wasn't completely successful, however (misspelled listings may have created problems), hence the latest fine.
Now, Alex von Schirmeister, the general manager of eBay in France, has stated, "We believe that the higher courts will overturn this ruling and ensure that eCommerce companies such as eBay will continue to provide a platform for buyers and sellers to trade authentic goods.
von Schirmeister also said, "The fine itself is disproportionate given that eBay complied with the Injunction. It is out of step with our legal victories in France, UK, Germany, Belgium and the U.S."
Look for further developments down the road, then, as eBay appeals the ruling.
Have You Read This?
> eBay Collects Another Win Against L'Oreal
> eBay Wins French Ruling Over L'Oreal Fakes
eBay Fined $2.6 Million Over LVMH Sales
December 1, 2009
If a French court has its way, eBay will soon have to fork over $2.6 million. The fine stems from a ban on the sale (or purchase) of LVMH goods, and actually ties to a case that ended in eBay being told to pay LVMH $61 million.
LVMH, which is the entity behind luxury brands like Louis Vuitton, Tag Heuer, and De Beers, won a major case against eBay in June of last year. LVMH claimed to be concerned about the sale of counterfeit merchandise, and eBay was supposed to keep all related items off its French site as a result.
Apparently eBay wasn't completely successful, however (misspelled listings may have created problems), hence the latest fine.
Now, Alex von Schirmeister, the general manager of eBay in France, has stated, "We believe that the higher courts will overturn this ruling and ensure that eCommerce companies such as eBay will continue to provide a platform for buyers and sellers to trade authentic goods.
von Schirmeister also said, "The fine itself is disproportionate given that eBay complied with the Injunction. It is out of step with our legal victories in France, UK, Germany, Belgium and the U.S."
Look for further developments down the road, then, as eBay appeals the ruling.
Have You Read This?
> eBay Collects Another Win Against L'Oreal
> eBay Wins French Ruling Over L'Oreal Fakes
Skype Founders Reportedly Close to Settlement with eBay
November 2, 2009
Update 3: Skype and eBay may be close to resolving their issues. Om Malik reports:
The ongoing legal scuffle between Skype, a division of eBay, and its founders, Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom, may soon see a resolution, according to someone familiar with the situation. The parties are in discussions to resolve the various issues. The talks are described to be at a sensitive stage and can break down without any conclusion.
Update 2: At the Shop.org Summit this week, eBay John Donahoe said that despite lawsuits, the $1.9 Billion deal will still close.
Update: The Skype founders filed another lawsuit today, complicating matters even more. Reuters reports:
The founders of Skype on Friday filed a new lawsuit against Index Ventures and one of its partners, Michelangelo Volpi, accusing him of misappropriating trade secrets to help broker the sale of the Internet phone service owned by eBay Inc.
Original Article: eBay is being sued by the founders of Skype for no less than $75 million per day. Skype founders Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom now own a company called Joltid. They have asked for an injunction to stop Skype from using a piece of software it owns in a filing in a US district court in San Francisco, according to Bloomberg.
Joltid alleges that eBay has been showing the source code for the software to third-party developers without their permission. Joltid claims that peer-to-peer technology of the software is being used in Skype, although they demanded to retain the rights to it back when eBay purchased Skype in 2005. Now, they want $75 million for every day the source code continues to be shown.
eBay says the Skype founders' claims are "without merit," but according to Bloomberg, eBay says it may shut down Skype if the dispute is not resolved, although they claim to be developing an "alternative technology."
The companies that are planning to buy Skype have also been named in the lawsuit.
eBay recently signed a deal to sell most of Skype, while retaining a 35% stake. The deal valued Skype at $2.75 billion. According to the deal, an investor group led by Silver Lake, which also includes Index Ventures, Andreessen Horowitz and the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) Investment Board would control about a 65% stake. eBay is supposed to receive approximately $1.9 billion in cash upon the completion of the sale.
You have to wonder if the acquisition will go through at all after this mess. This was probably a little more than these investors bargained for.
Have You Read This?
> The eBay-Skype Deal Hits Roadblock
> eBay Sells Skype, Which is Worth $2.75 Billion
UK High Court Serves Injunction Via Twitter
October 2, 2009
The UK High Court has found a new use for Twitter: serving legal injunctions. It seems that an anonymous Twitter user was satirizing/impersonating another man, and the High Court decided that the easiest way to contact him (or her) was through the site.
Here's the backstory: Donal Blaney runs a blog called Blaney's Blarney. He also owns a legal firm called Griffin Law. However, Blaney does not run the Twitter account blaneysblarney, and he took legal action to stop whoever's behind it. Blaney was successful, which led to the injunction.
As for what exactly the court order entails, the BBC reports, "The order demands the anonymous Twitter user reveal their identity and stop posing as Donal Blaney . . ."
This is really rather interesting for two reasons, then. First, although we've seen Facebook get drawn into legal battles before, Twitter is new to the arena. Second, the case might have some effect on what would-be anonymous individuals can get away with online.
Of course, with respect to this specific situation, it remains to be seen if the Twitter-delivered injunction will have any effect. It might fall victim to a "delete" command, or Twitter, which has rules against impersonating people, could suspend the blaneysblarney account before it's even viewed.
