European Commission brokers eBay counterfeit takedown agreement
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 05 May 2011
Were eBay and Amazon - the two e-commerce platforms who signed - bulldozed into this?
The European Commission has quietly brokered an industry agreement on 'notice and takedown' which will apply to major e-commerce hosting sites. The current signatories are a long list of rights-holders - eg Adidas, LVMH, MPA, Lego Group, Nike, Proctor and Gamble, Richemont, Microsoft, Unilever - plus the two major e-commerce platforms, eBay and Amazon.
The agreement, signed on 4 May, comes as a surprise to those outside the Commission, as the talks appear to have been held in secret. It is a 'Memorandum of Understanding' (MoU) which means that it is not legally binding, but may be used by rights-holders to pressure Internet companies.
The MoU is intended 'to enhance collaboration' between rights-holders and Internet e-commerce hosting companies. Specifically, it
sets out a 'notice and take-down' arrangement encompassing an automated reporting system, and an undertaking on the part of the Internet companies to deal with such notices in 'an efficient and comprehensive manner'... 'without undue delay'.
It includes 'co-operation' on sharing of information between the industries, which may include 'disclosure of identity and contact details of alleged infringers'.
However, what is strange is that the agreeement - whilst officially made available on the Commission website -does not carry the Commission logo or letterhead.
It's important that the agreement is not legally binding, which means that rights-holders may still take court action against eBay - and no doubt, they will hold out that threat if eBay does not comply.
It is unclear as yet what it will mean for eBay users, but an automated notice and take-down system leaves little room for traders to appeal. I would suggest that it will make it more difficult for people who genuinely sell second-hand goods or old stock.
And it is likely that the rights-holders will try to use it to take control of eBay and online channels as they seek to crush rival sellers, whose customers do not wish to pay for the so-called 'brand value' in their goods.
It smacks of the 'co-operative efforts' on trade marks which have been sneaked into ACTA, and which I have been questioning for some time. Such 'co-operative efforts ' are outside the EU legal framework, which made an explicit choice not to spell out notice and takedown procedures.
The fact that eBay and Amazon appear to be the lone Internet companies on the long list of signatories would suggest that the Commission succeeded with some bullying tactics.
Amendment 9 May 2011: A reader has pointed out to me that the Commission is using 'voluntary' agreements as a tactic to avoid scrutiny of either the European Parliament or the Council of Ministers. It is explained in this article on the EDRi website - although the article refers to a different series of talks, the tactic would appear to be very similar.
The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2011) EU Commission brokers counterfeit takedown agreement http://www.iptegrity.com 5 May 2011.
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed.
- Article Views: 9393
IPtegrity politics
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- 2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill