Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

L’Oréal and eBay settle dispute over online fakes

Seven years after L’Oréal sued eBay for not doing enough to counter the sale of fakes on its website, the two companies have settled their litigation, declaring that “cooperation, rather than litigation”, is the way forward in the fight against fakes

The terms of the deal are confidential but in a joint statement L’Oréal said it acknowledges eBay’s commitment in the fight against intellectual property infringement.

L’Oréal filed lawsuits against eBay in France, Belgium, the UK and Spain in 2007. In 2008 the Belgian first instance court dismissed L’Oréal’s claims. One year later, the Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance ruled that eBay had fulfilled its obligation “in good faith” to help prevent fake L’Oréal products from being sold on its website but the judge told the two parties to discuss their dispute with a mediator.

The case filed in the UK was ultimately referred to Europe’s highest court, which in 2011 addressed the liability of internet service providers for counterfeit goods sold online; the legality of sales of goods from outside the EU; and the legitimacy of keyword advertising.

The Court’s ruling said that the operator of an online marketplace cannot be exempted from liability for infringement when it “plays an active role” giving it knowledge of or control over data relating to offers for sale.

At the time, Stefan Krawczyk, senior director and counsel government relations, eBay Europe, told Managing IP that it is still up to the national courts to decide facts. “That still probably leaves 27 or more different interpretations,” he added. “The national court will again come into play: is it proportionate? Does it affect legitimate trade? Judgments will be made in national contexts.”

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

While the rules allow foreign firms to open local offices and offer IP services, a ban on litigation and practising Indian law could mean little will change
A New York federal court heard oral arguments this week in a copyright case pitting publishing giants against a digital library
Commissioner Hamano Koichi shares his vision for the JPO and explains that IP offices must promote innovation that drives social change
The Asia-Pacific awards research cycle has now begun – don’t miss on this opportunity be recognised in 2023
The Supreme Court, which is hearing two IP cases this week, should limit the power of US courts to rule on foreign sales
Safety standards wouldn’t lose copyright protection when named in law, so long as they were accessible for free online
In-house tech sources say Amgen v Sanofi has the potential to stifle their prosecution and litigation strategies if SCOTUS’s decision is too broad
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The Federal Circuit said tech firms can challenge the way the USPTO implemented Fintiv, but that won’t mean much for practitioners, say counsel
The England and Wales High Court handed down one of the most hotly anticipated FRAND rulings for some time