Judge Doesn’t Give Tiffany a Trademark Silver Spoon in eBay Flap | Threat Level from Wired.com
A New York federal judge ruled Monday in a lawsuit brought by Tiffany that the online auction site, eBay, is not required to police its site for counterfeited goods.

And:

The judge wrote that eBay escaped liability because it removed auctions for the jeweler’s counterfeited goods when notified by Tiffany.

Ha! That usually takes longer than the auction in question. I think this model is fundamentally flawed. Copyright is ridiculously long, but enforcement is basically left to the copyright owner. That’s fine for large corporations, but impossible for small businesses and indie labels. In Singapore there are large offices filled with people who do nothing but listen to every new release… and they listen for samples lifted from the songs their employer hold the copyright for. So I ask the chinese man who was my host and who managed a label in Singapore, what happens when they find a stolen sample. Well, we call the offending record company and they usually already know about it and admit it and pay up. Great, that’s basically what we have here in the States now.

And this in today – thanks Carol:

Software makers threaten to sue eBay over counterfeits | News – Digital Media – CNET News.com
First it was fashion giant LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA complaining about counterfeit fashion goods on eBay. Then it was Tiffany taking eBay to court.

Now it’s the software industry telling eBay that it needs to do more to detect and delete listings for counterfeit goods–or else.