Why won't ebay stop sellers of photocopies (e.g. patterns) describing them as 'vintage'?

[silveroboe]

I am tired of the increasing band of sellers who deliberately mislead buyers by claiming an old pattern e.g. for knitting, is 'vintage' or 'pre owned' or even 'original' when what they are selling (often for an extortionate price) is just a photocopy.

Fine if you are happy with a photocopy - but it should be made plain in the title that a photocopy is what is for sale. It's tedious having to click on an allegedly 'original' item to find it's just a photocopy, and all too often a very poor one, too, if feedback from disappointed buyers is to be believed.

There is also the question of copyright - I am no expert on copyright law, far from it, but from what I have read, ebay are condoning, if not deliberately encouraging, an illegal act.

[john1297576]

There is always the Money Back Guarantee, used properly it can prove expensive for the seller. Small amounts of money may be involved, but making the seller pay for returned tracked postage, and still paying Paypal fees, could amount a few £s plus a full refund would deter many.

Unfortunately as the amounts are probably small, most buyers would do nothing, which only encourages the practice.

Negative feedback would also help if only to warn others.

[red_magpie]

EBay would say that it doesn't condone or encourage copyright violation. Indeed, their VERO scheme gives the owners of intellectual property rights the power to register as such, and will remove any listing they report for breach of copyright.

The problem is that eBay only acts when a listing is reported, and then probably only when reported by the VERO rights owner - either the publishers or the owner of the original copyright. I doubt whether many have subscribed to VERO, let alone have the time and resources to scan listings to search for unauthorised reproduction.

The reality is that copyright abuse is endemic on eBay, of everything from embroidery patterns and artwork to home copied CDs and DVDs.