Sent it back today. If I'm lucky, this is only costing me two months of wasted time and $12 or so...

I don't blame you for being mad D. Pisses me off too.  Is there any recourse? Can you appeal their decision?

Next step- I've got to call the offending seller and threaten ........like I've got nothing better to do!!

You have got to be kidding me!!!!!  I don't blame you for being mad right now David.  I know I am and can imagine it would upset you even more!!!

Stupid people

I dunno, D.  Since being a scumsucking slimebal isn't illegal, and apparently doesn't both some people's moral or ethical senses, you may be forced to watermark your pictures.

I don't know if I'm getting too old, or just live too protected.  I am having such a difficult time of understanding why this could even happen.  Sorry, I don't have anything relevant to say.  I just find the entire situation apalling and feel completely helpless.

It might be fun to threaten them with a lawsuit for copyright infringement.  Do you have a lawyer friend who'd write up a nasty letter and send it to the ebay guy?   

More of their pictures are stolen.  I recognize many of their other picture too.  I will tell every dealer I can.  We will get them. 

Yeah I noticed that too.  I know I've seen some of the rings elsewhere and then they are using a lot of "glam shots" that companies put.  Only in their case they are showing a brand name ring and calling it "inspired by".  In this case I especially would want to see a copy of the real thing.  Can you imagine what quality you might get from a custom piece that is a fancy design?

This person needs to be shut down.  Hopefully if other sellers see that their stuff is stolen ebay would have to do something.

+1

Yes, this type of letter certainly gets the blood boiling- imagine how I felt when they sent the letter saying they were NOT taking any steps to stop this.

Has anyone found which sellers she's stolen photos from?

For me, the greater issue is that David is known throughout the industry for his distinctive photography. Love it or leave it, this is undeniably one of his photos. And, it is his photos which embody the overall "look" and identity of DBL/Rock Diamond. Kind of like his own little blue box. To say that he has no "proof" that this is his photo (or ring, for that matter) is completely untrue. He has the digital proof, as well as the camera man, and the ring (and a series of photos of the loose stone/ring/hand shot). Truth is, it CAN be proven. Now, will copyright law and stupid eBay policies support his claim that he's been ripped-off? Maybe. However, it will take lawyers and money to sort it all out.

Of course, the second issue is that the seller is advertising a 3ct stone in white gold, and he/she is showing a photo of a 2ct stone is WG that costs twice as much.

EBay really misses the ball on this one.

Knowing how far photographers have come in terms of protecting their work (by copyright) and how difficult it is to use someone else's photos, or even subject matter, for advertising without express permission from the photographer/owner of subject, it is obvious that eBay has really tried to circumvent the whole mess with its stupid disclaimer regarding use of their "product catalogue." Truth is, not too long ago, this vendor COULD be sued for use of David's photo, ESPECIALLY because he is using it for ADVERTISING without David's permission. EBay just wants to reap the benefits from everyone and absolve itself from any responsibility.

What makes this even more interesting is that it is not just about an eBay listing – the photo is part of DBL/Rock Diamond which does business outside eBay. If one had pockets full of money, the way to go here might be to come at the seller via DBL/Rock Diamond and corporate identity issues as well as copyright infringement and false advertising issues, not through the eBay listing.

THEN, just for fun, go after eBAy to get them to alter their stupid policies and get them to police their site better.

Unfortunately, there are so few laws regarding the internet, its like the Wild West... anything goes.

Seems to be that a better policy would be to pull something if there is ANY question of opwnership, and they should make that clear right off the bat. It is not hard to prove who posted something first.

I'm not sure the "product catalogue" gets anybody out of anything. From eBay's page on the aforementioned Product Catalogue:


No such link or user ID displayed on the page...