eBay loses another French trade mark case

The IPKat has been a little slow in reporting on Monday's decision of the Paris Commercial Court to order eBay to pay 40 million euros to Louis Vuitton, Christian Dior Couture and various perfume brands owned by the LVMH group (see the Times article here). The main reason appears to be damage to the reputation of the various trade marks caused by the sale of counterfeit products. The court pointed to 'serious faults' in the way eBay ran the site. eBay has said it will appeal.

The dispute concerning the perfumes was somewhat different as there the argument was that eBay shouldn't allow genuine products to be sold on its sites because this would interfere with LVMH's exclusive distribution network.

The IPKat would dearly love to know how the sums for the damages were calculated. Surely there aren't so many people in France who would have bought a genuine Louis Vuitton bag but decided not to because of the eBay alternative? If the damage was for harm to Louis Vuitton's reputation, does this mean that the French court has stumbled on the secret for calculating how much damage harming a mark's exclusivity does? As for the the perfumes, the IPKat is scratching his head as to how this accords with the rules of exhaustion of rights (assuming that is that the eBay perfume originates in the EU).
eBay loses another French trade mark case eBay loses another French trade mark case Reviewed by Unknown on Wednesday, July 02, 2008 Rating: 5


  1. In fact there are three decisions issued by the Tribunal de Commerce de Paris, which can be downloaded from pmdm.fr :

  2. Re the handbags, I assume the damages weren't all for instances where Ebay was notified but failed to take down. Any idea why the French court believed Ebay had a general obligation to monitor (as expressly prohibited under the e-commerce directive)?

  3. does anyone know where you can get hold of all 3 English translations of the judgments?


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.