Hey, Brad. Someone's stealing TMS pics on eBay.
Originally posted by rex@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
Originally posted by TomServo92+February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-rex@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
[/b][/quote]
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
[/b][/quote]
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
Originally posted by TomServo92+February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
[/b][/quote]
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
Originally posted by TomServo92+February 3, 2005, 9:29 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 3, 2005, 9:29 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
[/b][/quote]
Interesting that Ebay is not a court of law, nor are they required to follow the law if they do not wish on their private site. Why don't you stop talking about things for which you have no clue and go to law school for a few years, then take the bar. Maybe you can even take a few IP classes while you are there. Then you will be qualified to discuss this subject with me.
Has anybody informed Ebay that this guy is a fraud? No matter who owns the picture, it's still up for bid and I don't want anybody getting screwed over. Even if they are....less informed....enough to bid on it. I felt like being PC today.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:34 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:34 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:29 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
[/b][/quote]
First off scooter, I never said anything about IP law or said Ebay was a court of law. Stop putting words in my mouth. I was talking about how Ebay handles claims of sellers who are using photos that aren't their own from personal experience. After all, we're talking about an auction on Ebay, not an IP theft lawsuit (just thought I would clue you in to that since you didn't seem to be clear on it).
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:34 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:34 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:29 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
[/b][/quote]
Well, it doesn't really matter if ebay is a court of law or not. if you would actually read what the guy posted, he said that he has been in situations like this before, and upon informing ebay, ebay has dealt with the issue. No one pressed charges or brought the law into this. If it is against ebay's policies to use other people's works to sell your merchendise, then this guy is in violation of that. It doesn't matter if it is illegal or not, as ebay is free to set their own policies.
The Mustang Source FOUNDER





Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 9,890
Likes: 11
From: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
I emailed asking him to remove the photo. I wouldn't mind if it were a "normal" auction, but bidding over MSRP is a ripoff, and I don't want my site associated with it.
Originally posted by jsheehan+February 3, 2005, 9:44 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jsheehan @ February 3, 2005, 9:44 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
Interesting that Ebay is not a court of law, nor are they required to follow the law if they do not wish on their private site. Why don't you stop talking about things for which you have no clue and go to law school for a few years, then take the bar. Maybe you can even take a few IP classes while you are there. Then you will be qualified to discuss this subject with me.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:34 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:29 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:23 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:18 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:13 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
<!--QuoteBegin-rex
@February 3, 2005, 8:55 PM
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's a good thing...why do you think the logo is on the picture...it pays to advertise...
It's also Brad's property being used without his permission. Plus, some people might think he's associated with TMS and if he turns out be a fraudalent seller, it then becomes bad advertising.
Unless Brad took the picture, or someone he knows did so, and they transferred the property rights in the picture to him, there is no copyright in the picture. You don't gain a property right in something just by slapping your logo or trademark on it.
There is a difference b/w giving it to him to use and transferring the property right to him. Also, by virtue of the fact that the logo remained on there, it is obvious he is not trying to pass it off as his photo. Intellectual property laws are geared at keeping people from 1) passing IP off as their own, 2) making profit off of someone else's IP through sale or distribution, and 3) precluding someone from using the IP in such a way as to offend the artistic purposes for which it was created. We have none of those here.
If you look closely you'll see the photo is by Amy, who is a member here. I'm sure she gave the pic to Brad. Otherwise he wouldn't have put his logo on it.
I used to sell on Ebay and I had other sellers taking my photos with my company name on them very similar to what Brad has on that photo and use them in their auctions. All I had to do was notify Ebay that it was my picture and they would end the offending auction then and there, no questions asked. Unless that seller can prove without a question that it is his picture, Ebay rules on the side of complainent. Don't tell I'm wrong either. I've been there and done that dozens of times on Ebay and I've never had Ebay rule on the side of the offender.
Interesting that Ebay is not a court of law, nor are they required to follow the law if they do not wish on their private site. Why don't you stop talking about things for which you have no clue and go to law school for a few years, then take the bar. Maybe you can even take a few IP classes while you are there. Then you will be qualified to discuss this subject with me.
[/b][/quote]
Exactly!
Originally posted by StangNut@February 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:46 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:46 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-StangNut@February 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
[/b][/quote]
And? I didn't start the thread so what's your point? My point is that the auction can be shutdown by notifying Ebay. It's not a legal question but a question of Ebay's policies, of which that seller is in violation.
Originally posted by TomServo92+February 3, 2005, 9:52 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 3, 2005, 9:52 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
This is the post that started the thread!!
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:46 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
@February 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
This is the post that started the thread!!
[/b][/quote]
And I clearly agree! The point that we were talking about this from the standpoint of Ebay and not legally was not introduced until after both of our first posts, mine of which was responding to the question, is it legal.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim+February 3, 2005, 9:53 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KansasCityTim @ February 3, 2005, 9:53 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
This is the post that started the thread!!
And? I didn't start the thread so what's your point? My point is that the auction can be shutdown by notifying Ebay. It's not a legal question but a question of Ebay's policies, of which that seller is in violation.
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:52 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:46 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
@February 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
This is the post that started the thread!!
And? I didn't start the thread so what's your point? My point is that the auction can be shutdown by notifying Ebay. It's not a legal question but a question of Ebay's policies, of which that seller is in violation.
[/b][/quote]
OK. Then let's just chalk this one up to a misunderstanding and move on. I'm sure the other forum members are tired of reading this pointless exchange.
Originally posted by TomServo92+February 3, 2005, 10:01 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 3, 2005, 10:01 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
This is the post that started the thread!!
And? I didn't start the thread so what's your point? My point is that the auction can be shutdown by notifying Ebay. It's not a legal question but a question of Ebay's policies, of which that seller is in violation.
And I clearly agree! The point that we were talking about this from the standpoint of Ebay and not legally was not introduced until after both of our first posts, mine of which was responding to the question, is it legal.
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:53 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@February 3, 2005, 9:52 PM
Originally posted by KansasCityTim@February 3, 2005, 9:46 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
<!--QuoteBegin-StangNut
@February 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...4524851952&rd=1
Can they do that? Is it legal?
This is the post that started the thread!!
And? I didn't start the thread so what's your point? My point is that the auction can be shutdown by notifying Ebay. It's not a legal question but a question of Ebay's policies, of which that seller is in violation.
And I clearly agree! The point that we were talking about this from the standpoint of Ebay and not legally was not introduced until after both of our first posts, mine of which was responding to the question, is it legal.
[/b][/quote]
I happily agree.


