09-09-2018 12:17 PM - edited 09-09-2018 12:21 PM
Hey guys!
So this is the second message I get from this person.
Both time I called eBay anchor store support and was told to ignore it.
I have very little items from those brands and it wouldn't be they end of the world to remove them but I don't want to encourage this kind of bullying.
Should I fold and comply by removing listings or should I do as eBay suggested and ignore this? Is the possibility of them suing me real?
By the way - this message was sent on a Saturday.
---------------------------------
It has come to our attention that you are STILL IN VIOLATION with Federal Trademark and unfair competition laws of Petmate, Chuckit!, JW Pet, FAT CAT, Aspen Pet, Ruffmaxx, Dogzilla, Doskocil, Booda, Precision Pet Products, Jackson Galaxy, Muttnation, WWE, Zoobilee, Wetnoz, CALMZwith its principal place of business in Arlington, Texas. You HAVE IGNORED COMPLIANCE with our trademarks by continuing to sell our products online. You have exceeded your 5 days to remove all of our products sold by you online. Please remove all of our products immediately or we will be forced to pursue all legal remedies available to us under Federal Trademark and unfair competition laws.
------------------------------------
Should I politely tell this person I contacted eBay twice regarding this and they told me not to take any action and that those concerns/complaints should be directed directly to eBay?
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-10-2018 11:45 AM - edited 09-10-2018 11:47 AM
@vip-marketplace wrote:
So this is the second message I get from this person.
Both time I called eBay anchor store support and was told to ignore it.
Hi, I may be able to help you and I'm sorry I didn't see your post earlier. I'm an eBay seller, but I worked for a number of years as a professional paralegal and document drafter for several large corporate-commercial law firms in Vancouver, BC. I can tell you with certainty that this message is not legitimate. For your sake, and for the sake of others who may be targeted with this sort of bullying, here is why:
1) I've reviewed the text you posted and marked specifically the portions that are absolutely markers of a false or fraudulent "legal" letter. Not much left, is there! Really, I laughed out loud at this so-called "notice".
It has come to our attention that you are STILL IN VIOLATION with Federal Trademark and unfair competition laws of Petmate, Chuckit!, JW Pet, FAT CAT, Aspen Pet, Ruffmaxx, Dogzilla, Doskocil, Booda, Precision Pet Products, Jackson Galaxy, Muttnation, WWE, Zoobilee, Wetnoz, CALMZwith its principal place of business in Arlington, Texas. You HAVE IGNORED COMPLIANCE with our trademarks by continuing to sell our products online. You have exceeded your 5 days to remove all of our products sold by you online. Please remove all of our products immediately or we will be forced to pursue all legal remedies available to us under Federal Trademark and unfair competition laws.
2) Aside from specifics about this text (which are too long to post here), there are other telltale mistakes the sender has made:
You did the right thing in notifying eBay about this, and they gave you the right advice to ignore it. I would go further and suggest that you not contact the company or companies who own these products in any way, but report this fraudulent letter to the authorities. There are governmental internet watchdog agencies that may be able to deal with the source of this chicanery. I'm afraid I don't have a link for you immediately, but someone else here may be able to suggest an internet fraud reporting site connected with the federal government or an international authority.
Since I did this sort of work for so many years, it's actually a fun exercise for me to analyze the stupidities in a fraudulent "notice". Rather than clog up this discussion with a lengthy exegesis, I'll do it off-line and post it shortly as a jpeg scan.
09-09-2018 12:32 PM
If you're extremely concerned about that email, for starters confirm the email address is valid. If you did have something listed that did NOT meet copyright standards, you would be getting an email from eBay also advising you of the item/s they were concerned with and they would just be pulled advising you and would be up to you to resolve before you could relist. See link for specifics.
https://www.ebay.ca/pages/help/tp/vero-rights-owner.html
-CM
09-09-2018 12:40 PM
There are no e-mail address unfortunately. The message was sent from a brand new eBay user ID directly in eBay.
09-09-2018 12:56 PM
That "should" be a clue it is not legit.
-CM
09-09-2018 12:59 PM
But I mean how else would they be able to contact a seller on eBay?
I don't think they would be able to get my e-mail address anywhere. Would they?
09-09-2018 01:15 PM - edited 09-09-2018 01:17 PM
They just hit Contact Seller and bob's your uncle.
"Federal trademark" Uh-huh. Of what country? Where do they plan to have you tried?
Ignore -- since they actually have no idea who they are, only your ID.
They are not signed up for VeRO, or eBay would be contacting you.
If you are very concerned, email them the postal address of your family/company lawyer and ask that all further contact be through them and on paper.
Do you have a 'delete' button on your computer? They are the latest craze, I hear.
09-09-2018 02:20 PM
I couldn't read the name of the 'law firm' on that pdf.
Have you googled it? Including Google Maps?
09-09-2018 03:11 PM
09-09-2018 05:11 PM
09-09-2018 05:57 PM
09-09-2018 05:59 PM
09-09-2018 07:19 PM
sorry but i would take it seriously, i would contact the parent company, and ask if in fact they have issued a cease and desist order against me, then i would go from there..
09-09-2018 07:55 PM
From what I understand a cease and desist letter has to be a physical letter, not an online message addressed to an ebay ID. Unless the op is using another company's pictures or has a contract with that company and is not following the contract, they don't have a right to tell them what they can or can not sell. The letter is more than likely from another ebay seller that figures they should be the only one allowed to sell those products.
09-09-2018 07:55 PM
Any legitimate parent company would do better than create random ebay user IDs to issue that manner of legal notice. (Starting with VERO. ) This threat is bogus, actual lawyers do a lot better. That's the reason they get paid the big bucks.
09-09-2018 08:18 PM
09-10-2018 02:00 AM
A) You don't have a dealer agreement with any of these brands, hence they aren't really on firm footing. There issue lies with their distributors not requiring authorization for their lines and filtering them from their standard XML/CSV feed any customer of said distributor can have. Most brands are cheap and won't pay the fees distributors charge to actually put an authorization procedure in place for the line and have customized data fees for authorized customers. Any ecommerce retailer of size that utilizes data feeds deals with this **bleep** regularly and standard is to ignore it unless there is an actual agreement in place.
B) Issues of this nature are typically handled between the marketplace and the legal representative of a given brand. A brand may choose to file VERO claims for unauthorized usage of assets as another tactic.
09-10-2018 02:14 AM
09-10-2018 03:21 AM
@retroman_studios wrote:
True, but OP won't know until they contact the rights holder. Some don't care who sells the product as long as it sells. But they may not take kindly to folks running the brand through the mud through fake or misrepresentation of any kind. It is situations like this that can make some brands go authorized in the first place.
The "misrepresent" the brand line usually translates to they want to maintain MAP pricing, whether it is official/unofficial, verbal or written. This is what the majority of Amazon line/seller pulls are for. The beef they have is a lot of dropshippers simply have no idea what their pricing structure is and simply apply their standard markup. Mind you, they create their own problems by not paying distributors to set this up properly as well. It's usually a few thousand dollars fee-wise to get a distributor to add a percentage load to the dropship feed cost so that basically the retailer's cost is equal to the MAP price. Either block the feed or load the cost and the problem is solved for considerably less than the cost of a retainer.
09-10-2018 08:48 AM - edited 09-10-2018 08:58 AM
OP here.
I'm trying to understand what would happen would they go through with their legal threats.
I have no lawyer or insurance of any sort and I am not incorporated.
If I risk losing my business and house because of this, I think I'll simply remove the listings and be done with it. Even if its just a 1% chance of it happening, not interested in taking it.
09-10-2018 09:32 AM