Court Rules that Tiffany & Co., not eBay, should police its trademark

In a recent ruling involving Tiffany and eBay, a U.S. District Court judge ruled that eBay can't be held liable for trademark infringement "based solely on their generalized knowledge that trademark infringement might be occurring on their websites."

Tiffany had sued eBay to remove bogus items and immediately suspend sellers that Tiffany suspected of trademark infringement. Tiffany’s legal team had alleged that eBay should more closely scrutinize its sellers and their merchandise in order to better crack down on numerous instances of trademark infringement and counterfeit jewelry sales. Tiffany also sought monetary damages.

eBay claimed that it was not in a position to determine which goods were counterfeit and that Tiffany did not consistently participate in eBay’s programs to prevent trademark infringement. eBay also contended that it was working diligently to respond to allegations of trademark infringement and that it could not be entirely responsible for the actions of its users.

According to Judge Richard Sullivan, “Tiffany has not alleged, nor does the evidence support a conclusion, that all of the Tiffany merchandise sold through eBay is counterfeit…Were Tiffany to prevail on its argument that generalized statements of infringement were sufficient to impute knowledge to eBay of any and all infringing acts, Tiffany’s rights in its mark would dramatically expand, potentially stifling legitimate sales of Tiffany goods on eBay…”

The moral of this story for trademark owners? You must diligently police your own trademark.