It's ok it says "Unofficial".....

[JMugs]

I have just been explaining to a customer that I can't print what they want because of copyright. So they say "but you can just point out it isn't "official" merchandise, like these do and it must be OK because they sell 1000's of things like this on ebay!"

No wonder they can't understand when you have shops like this out there. Here is the link they sent me

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/The-Vamps-Mug ... Swg3FUkqvD

Oh well I'll carry on in my own little bubble.

Janners

[GoonerGary]

Here is another company selling unofficial counterfeits.

http://stores.ebay.co.uk/sportingprofil ... 7675.l2563

The deluded belief that calling it unofficial is not tricking the right minded customer into thinking it is official merchandise.

[JMugs]

With 53000 sales you have to wonder what is going on sometimes.
I got pulled up by Harley Davidson for mentioning that an image of one their bikes was on a mug I printed. I could use the design as it was mine but I couldn't mention HD. That was 1 design that was live for about 2 weeks!
No way was I going to try and argue with them!

Janners

[mrs maggot]

i have had this argument over xmas with our local trading standards, for things being sold on facebook - the items, trainers, track suits, handbags were all listed as being "REPLICA" and apparently as the word "REPLICA" was being used, there was no fraud taking place as people bought them understanding that they were not genuine....... go figure

[JMugs]

I do wonder what is going on. Our local trading standards has just been reduced from 11 staff who couldn't keep up with everything to 6 staff. So maybe they just haven't got the time to deal with it hence it gets "fobbed off".
I think with my luck if I used "replica" I'd end up on the pointy end of a stick and being fined stupid amounts as "an example"!

[Brixhamboy]

The point is that you cannot legally use the term 'Replica' to get around these issues. The original copyright owner is still protected under the terms of the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Only the originator has the rights to reproduce any image content or a particular design of something. Anything else comes under either a direct copy or 'passing off' where a near copy attempts to ride on the back of a successful product.

Replica can apply to something like a gun where the product is not attempting to be a 'gun' but instead a legitimate copy for decorative purposes. Even then, the original holder of the design, Copyright or patent has a claim on whether this can be done. This claim lasts for many decades depending on the country of origin so it is possible to copy under some specific circumstances however the examples so far shown in this thread all appear to be breaching copyright etc. You can hardly have a 'replica' photograph can you? That's commonly known as a copy!

Trading standards should respond without question to a report. Ebay I find far more frustrating because they appear to condone blatant copying and even make it difficult to report unless you actually hold the copyright yourself.

Incidentally, for those on here tempted to reproduce images etc that belong to other people; the financial penalties that apply under UK law are without limit!!! I know people who have been put out of business overnight by the big companies who look out for infringements of their copyright and designs. Try Nike if you want a really hard time!

[GoonerGary]

Trading Standards are occupied with goods which endanger the public, like counterfeit alcohol sold in corner shops. But counterfeiters who overstep the mark will face the music, all it takes is a competitor to make a complaint.

I was targeted by a Chinese counterfeiter over Christmas, it took ages for Amazon to receive the proof. He got kicked off, but is back again this week. Just reported another seller last night; although she went to a lot of trouble to imitate my designs, she is just naive trying to print famous photos onto canvases! I didn't know that the financial penalties under UK law were limitless, I though that was an American thing? I'm trying to find advice on this new Copyright court, I had a guy trying to sell thousands of products using my designs in direct competition, but I don't know if you can sue for attempted sales??

[Brixhamboy]

The basic principle of the 1988 Act is to stop the copying of anyone's work whether it be how something appears or how it functions. With images this means ANY form of publication is an offence so my personal take on this would be that even to advertise [your] work on a public platform such as Amazon is infringing your copyright whether anything is sold or not. I suppose you could always threaten Amazon since they provide the platform but I suspect there will be hidden t&c's somewhere deep inside Amazon's vaults that exempt them form all responsibility.

Could be worth a go, though, if they seem to drag their feet.

Not so easy with 'physical' designs because Amazon would require physical proof and Ebay are just plain not interested although I equally suspect much of this attitude is down to the apathy and lack of awareness of the general public. We do lack any sort of 'sharp' response to this practise generally so with court the only real option it is hardly surprising these offenders just keep reappearing.


Trading Standards are indeed busy but they still have an obligation to take details and where possible follow up your complaints.

It's been a while since I had to be up to speed with Copyright Law so I should add there might have been 'tweaks' to it that I am unaware of. I'm a cynic when it comes to UK law; maybe it's just me but doesn't it seem that laws work in the favour of the bad guy or the big company more often than not?

[GoonerGary]

They do indeed. Ebay actually have a better policy than Amazon when removing infringements. Although they do not act until you get solicitors involved, the vero program does not require physical proof, just a report and they'll remove it. With Amazon and trademark infringements, a report from the trademark owner should be enough. Someone did take Amazon to court in the U.S. on this same issue as me, but their courts said that acting on the Notice of Infringement wasn't enough to act on infringements. So what the hell is the point of that notice? I may well try it in a British court, they are profiting from counterfeit goods through sales and advertising revenue. Money which is owed to me.

[gstk]

They do indeed. Ebay actually have a better policy than Amazon when removing infringements. Although they do not act until you get solicitors involved, the vero program does not require physical proof, just a report and they'll remove it. With Amazon and trademark infringements, a report from the trademark owner should be enough. Someone did take Amazon to court in the U.S. on this same issue as me, but their courts said that acting on the Notice of Infringement wasn't enough to act on infringements. So what the hell is the point of that notice? I may well try it in a British court, they are profiting from counterfeit goods through sales and advertising revenue. Money which is owed to me.

Ebay dont rush to help - we have a design we made and use and sell a lot of. It was being copied by two other ebay sellers. We asked them to stop, they ignored. we told ebay and they said we had to prove copyright. We didnt actually have copyright on them so after a lot of tooing and froing I played a gamble and said that I wasnt wasting my time proving the copyright and as Ebay were obviously condoning the sale of the copies we would take measures against them. I couldnt believe it when they removed them.