topic Watermarks and text in Buying

Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 04:13:16 GMT

Advice please on this seller's listings.

# 392851220328

I can't find anywhere to report the listings, nor can we report sellers anymore.

Obviously she hasn't heard of the ebay catalogue, or even slander for that matter.

She does not have ownership of ANY of the items she has listed.

VERO is no good as most of the items are vintage and the companies no longer exist.

The combinations of Report Item don't cover what she is doing.

Any suggestions?

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 04:28:07 GMT

I know ebay has a policy against using watermarks, but they don't police it.

Re: Watermarks and text

tazzieterror — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 05:52:00 GMT

First, I'm pretty sure eBay backtracked on their policy of forbidding watermarks - I was ready to go to war with them over it when they announced the coming change, and then it never happened. All my images are watermarked.

Second, if the seller you've given the item number for is taking original photos of their cards to sell, then those photos are indeed the intellectual property of that seller, and they're entitled to watermark them and prevent others from using them.

Whether that seller has permission to display the design on the cards in the photos they take is another issue altogether (as that could be IP belonging to another entity again), but copyright of the photos they take themselves falls to them by default, regardless of the content.

If instead the seller is taking the image of the cards from elsewhere, then none of that applies.

Re: Watermarks and text

davewil1964 — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:04:57 GMT

She doesn't seem to think that sending stuff untracked won't come back to bite her if the item goes missing, either.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:07:15 GMT

The actual items are scanned.

Is that the same as taking a photo?

Some of her listings are of Disney images. I'm sure the Disney Corp hold a different view of the watermark.

Did you bother to check her listings and look at the other image of text?

Can't see that being accepted by ebay.

The other seller mentioned should threaten legal action.

It's slander IMO.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:12:13 GMT

@davewil1964 wrote:
She doesn't seem to think that sending stuff untracked won't come back to bite her if the item goes missing, either.

A lot of sellers in that category have the same thing on their listings.

Some even encourage paying for registered mail "so you don't lose them"

Don't know how many have been taken to task for missing mail.

It's probably all bluff and bluster.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:29:44 GMT

Maybe she thinks ebay pays for the loss.

SELLER TERMS OF REFERENCE. Seller is not accountable for lost mail by Australia Post when buyer chooses standard post method.Lost items require buyer to lodge with eBay through resolution centre.

Re: Watermarks and text

tazzieterror — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:49:52 GMT

@imastawka wrote:
The actual items are scanned.

Is that the same as taking a photo?

Some of her listings are of Disney images. I'm sure the Disney Corp hold a different view of the watermark.

Did you bother to check her listings and look at the other image of text?

Can't see that being accepted by ebay.

The other seller mentioned should threaten legal action.

It's slander IMO.

You're not approaching this logically. If I have a pair of Nike shoes I want to sell on eBay, can I not put a photo of them on the listing because Nike owns the IP on the swoosh logo/tick?

If my niece dresses up as as 'Elsa' from the movie 'Frozen' in an offically licensed Disney 'Elsa' costume bought from Kmart, and I take a photo of her pretending to be a princess, do you think Disney now owns that photo because of the costume being worn?

If it's a particularly good photo, are Disney entitled to just take it and use it on the packaging of future 'Elsa' costumes?

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 06:56:25 GMT

And the naming of the other seller as a thief, on her listings, is ok with you?

Re: Watermarks and text

digital*ghost — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 07:23:11 GMT

It's not slander if it's true.

That doesn't mean I think it's appropriate (because I don't - quite the opposite), just that if the other seller is indeed pilfering that seller's images, they wouldn't have a case against the seller for slander. IMO it's a really bad look for the seller to be doing that, just as it's a bad look for sellers to name buyers they've had bad dealings with, so it's not helping the seller JMHO.

The eBay catalogue has nothing to do with it - images uploaded to ebay don't suddenly become a catalogue in itself and all images free to use for anyone who knows how to nick a photo from a listing. eBay has to select an image for inclusion into the actual catalogue, and make that image available to select when listing an item.

The text / watermarks policy was absolutely walked back - it has been each time eBay has tried to make it a policy - it isn't just a policy that's not policed, it's not a policy at all.

The one and only policy eBay has that you could try and report them for is:

All content in a listing must be directly related to the item or the seller's terms and conditions

But it's kinda shaky, because "my intellectual property is not available for other's use" could be an implied T&C, since copyright is automatically granted.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 07:52:56 GMT

It's not slander if it's true.

So, how does the named seller 'steal' images from this seller , when this seller scans images and the seller she is accusing of theft takes photos of her cards?

That doesn't work.

It seems to have all blown up because of a neg FB given by the seller in the OP, but under a different ID.

Re: Watermarks and text

digital*ghost — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 08:10:42 GMT

That's why I used the word "if", because I'm not in a position to involve myself in a dispute between two sellers whose argument is over something I've only heard about anecdotally, nor make any judgements on who's done what - I just wanted to point out that if the allegations of image theft are true, it's not slander, which I felt was important to note in a thread where legal action (or the threat of) is a suggested response to this kind of issue.

My main purpose for responding to the thread was to provide clarifying info, particularly when it comes to other seller's images (which I do every single time it's suggested or implied that the whole eBay image catalogue thing means sellers have carte blanche to use any image uploaded to any listing).

Re: Watermarks and text

tazzieterror — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 08:22:17 GMT

Just seconding everything digi has said above, and for essentially the same reasons.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Thu, 25 Jun 2020 09:23:51 GMT

I bow to both your explanations / answers.

Thank you for your time.

But it smacks of something a little more than 'poor form by a seller'

This category is for genteel little old ladies, not cutthroat antics.

I'm sad to see it sink so low.

Re: Watermarks and text

imastawka — Sat, 27 Jun 2020 03:28:50 GMT

I know....a dog with a bone...but,

The seller listed in the OP, it seems, has opened that account, to distance herself from her original account.

Read the FB both negs and neuts to see what a piece of work she is.

She seems to think ebay pays for lost items as well. Guess she doesn't check her Paypal balance at all, and has never noticed.

e.g. # 174279517367

I know it's the same person. The FB checks out.

Both ID's have bought from me, and both have been added to the BBL

She would have been under the radar, except for that text in the pics.

Re: Watermarks and text

tazzieterror — Sat, 27 Jun 2020 03:44:09 GMT

Oh I do enjoy some of their replies to the negatives received on the 5500+ fb account. So far my favourite is:

"Here’s a message 4 u.. congrats u made my blocked list. SELLERS A DIFFICULT ONE"

I think they meant to write "BUYERS A DIFFICULT ONE" but it seems accurate nonetheless!