Siglent They filed a "wrongful trademark claim"

[RobertBG]

kaz911,
   That would matter outside of Ebay but what you fail to realize is that Ebay has found a way to use it to their advantage to drive prices up and they will enforce it if they so desire.I'm not sure if it is limited to certain companies that have contracts with them or not but if I go and sell a genuine Garrett turbo below a certain price you better believe that I'll get a request from Ebay just like the OP did.First they will claim it's fake and want to know if it is genuine and once proven they will leverage the price or it'll have to be set to disclose the price in checkout.They also market software to companies to help them enforce such things.Many people see MAP as price fixing and I can see where they come from but it is a standard practice here in the States.

I'll be more then happy to dig up some of the issues I've had on Ebay with Garrett and Borg Warner both doing the same tactic to me when I used to sella lot on Ebay.

[Ian.M]

Few of us care whether or not the O.P. is bottom-feeding scum. However when Siglent put themselves in that category by abusing EBAY's procedures to get an item taken down and then trying to blame an allegedly new staff member, and finally admitting it was due to their distribution channel control strategy, it immediately became of interest to everyone here.

[-jeffB]

I think you fail to realize that he was using a  Ebay store account and any company with a MAP for their products (pick one you love dearly and I'll show you it probably applies to them) can and will enforce a commercial trader

You appear to have the misconception that opening an eBay Store somehow magically confers "commercial trader" status. In reality, you can open an eBay Store just to get the discount on final value fees, and a few other perks. It doesn't require or confer any "official status" as a business; it just means that you've agreed to pay eBay a monthly subscription fee, and they've agreed to lower your FVFs.

[rx8pilot]

Few of us care whether or not the O.P. is bottom-feeding scum. However when Siglent put themselves in that category by abusing EBAY's procedures to get an item taken down and then trying to blame an allegedly new staff member, and finally admitting it was due to their distribution channel control strategy, it immediately became of interest to everyone here.

I glad I'm not the only one. RobertBG can only talk about the OP - of which on ly a few care about. The response of the company is much more interesting. This is my broken record response.

I don't care about the OP. He could be the devil for all I care. The fact or non-facts related to his writings are not a part of my thought process. I see that others have a similar view.

[miguelvp]

Few of us care whether or not the O.P. is bottom-feeding scum. However when Siglent put themselves in that category by abusing EBAY's procedures to get an item taken down and then trying to blame an allegedly new staff member, and finally admitting it was due to their distribution channel control strategy, it immediately became of interest to everyone here.

I glad I'm not the only one. RobertBG can only talk about the OP - of which on ly a few care about. The response of the company is much more interesting. This is my broken record response.

I don't care about the OP. He could be the devil for all I care. The fact or non-facts related to his writings are not a part of my thought process. I see that others have a similar view.

That's my broken record as well

[nctnico]

Few of us care whether or not the O.P. is bottom-feeding scum. However when Siglent put themselves in that category by abusing EBAY's procedures to get an item taken down and then trying to blame an allegedly new staff member, and finally admitting it was due to their distribution channel control strategy, it immediately became of interest to everyone here.

I glad I'm not the only one. RobertBG can only talk about the OP - of which on ly a few care about. The response of the company is much more interesting. This is my broken record response.

I don't care about the OP. He could be the devil for all I care. The fact or non-facts related to his writings are not a part of my thought process. I see that others have a similar view.

That's my broken record as well

Price fixing is bad for competition whether it is somehow legal or not.

[electrolust]

Price fixing is bad for competition whether it is somehow legal or not.

Of course it is, and that's why it is illegal.

This isn't a case of price fixing.

[madires]

I am still unclear how to make sure second hand Siglent gear I might want to buy has any warranty coverage. I dont mean funny US one month token support. I mean proper EU 2 year minimum warranty.
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees/

The two year period is valid for new stuff from a commercial seller in the EU. Used stuff has also 2 years but can be reduced to one year when sold by a commercial seller. I'm not sure if the latter is the case for all EU countries. Private sellers can reduce the warranty period to zero. If the seller doesn't state a reduced warranty period for used stuff two years are assumed.

[MT]

This thread is like Frankenstein!             Look! My Siglent is aliiivvvee.....!.....and it swings..........sort of!

[metalphreak]

It's a common tactic to get eBay to remove listings, so the manufacturer can continue to flog new units from their own ebay listings.

Common tactic is to claim copyright on the images, if you used a stock photo from their website or similar.

Specialized (who make bike stuff) did it to me once. Never buying from them again.

http://pastebin.com/NBVESULa

Add Tupperware / Nutrimetics to the list of s***c*** companies that do it as well.

http://pastebin.com/NezwCgv0

There's a pattern to the types of companies that do this, and they are ones I now avoid. It's pathetic that they go to such trouble to remove a tiny chance of losing a "new" sale to private sellers.

Also, after reading more of the thread, I don't think the above were DMCA requests (does that even apply in Australia?). There was no option to respond or dispute the claim. Just listings deleted (along with all the personally written description text...)

[rx8pilot]

That is the thing....it is underhanded. Even if they have the legal grounds, it seems heavy handed for no good reason.

[timb]

Rosetta Stone is on my list to never buy from. My mom had a *brand new* copy of their Spanish software, in the original box, never opened with the security seals still intact. (If I remember right, it was a gift she bought for someone but it turned out they already had it; she waited too long and couldn't return it to the store.)

Anyway, she had it up for like 50% of the retail price. They filed a counterfeit claim. She could prove it was real (had the receipt), then they said it was against their EULA to resell it. You know, the EULA that's inside the sealed box. The one she could have never possibly agreed to.

She's been on eBay since 1999 with a 100% seller rating. She's sold hundreds of thousands of dollars of vintage kitchenware and designer leather goods with basically no issues. Of course, eBay sided with Rosetta Stone.

So she bitched up the chain at Rosetta Stone. Initially, they offered her a *credit* for more software. She finally got the CEO's assistant. A week later she had a check for the full retail price of the software. (Which, considering the time she put into it, wasn't worth it. For her, it was about the principle of the thing.)

So, my point is this isn't uncommon behavior on eBay. That doesn't make it any less despicable. That's why most of us have a problem with what Siglent did.

[Wuerstchenhund]

The two year period is valid for new stuff from a commercial seller in the EU. Used stuff has also 2 years but can be reduced to one year when sold by a commercial seller. I'm not sure if the latter is the case for all EU countries. Private sellers can reduce the warranty period to zero. If the seller doesn't state a reduced warranty period for used stuff two years are assumed.

That is pretty much only the case in Germany (where even private sellers need long-winded legalese to avoid being on the hook for two years; but don't use the text too often or it counts as commercial-like activities, and you're on the hook again).

Other EU countries use a much more common-sense approach where if no warranty is stated by a private seller then there is none.

[EEVblog]

There's a pattern to the types of companies that do this, and they are ones I now avoid. It's pathetic that they go to such trouble to remove a tiny chance of losing a "new" sale to private sellers.

I hope you avoid Rigol too, because they did this about 6 years ago.

[timb]

Also, RobertBJ, you seem to be hung up on the fact the OP listed it as NEW. He didn't. It was NEW (OTHER) which directs you to the description for details. The OP says the item is mint, original box, etc.

Basically, he bought it, hooked it up, tried it out and then Siglent released a newer model, which he bought to replace it with. The NEW (OTHER) category is often used for display and demo models. There's very little difference between that and what the OP described.

Honestly, I might have listed the item the same way. If you read eBay's guidelines for the NEW (OTHER) category, he's well within his rights. Keep in mind also that eBay doesn't have rules. They have guidelines. Also, eBay employees tend to make shit up as they go along, often contradicting themselves from case to case and employee to employee. I have personally witnessed this, as have family members and people on this forum.

Finally, you're not going to win this fight because you're wrong. How wrong? As wrong as Siglent was. This wrong:

[timb]

There's a pattern to the types of companies that do this, and they are ones I now avoid. It's pathetic that they go to such trouble to remove a tiny chance of losing a "new" sale to private sellers.

I hope you avoid Rigol too, because they did this about 6 years ago.

But haven't they stopped this practice since then?

[metalphreak]

There's a pattern to the types of companies that do this, and they are ones I now avoid. It's pathetic that they go to such trouble to remove a tiny chance of losing a "new" sale to private sellers.

I hope you avoid Rigol too, because they did this about 6 years ago.

I didn't know about the Rigol one until I read this thread. There was a 1 page thread linked with only a few posts in it. Was there ever any more evidence brought to light?

[Zero999]

I go and sell a genuine Garrett turbo below a certain price you better believe that I'll get a request from Ebay just like the OP did.First they will claim it's fake and want to know if it is genuine and once proven they will leverage the price or it'll have to be set to disclose the price in checkout.

So what just because other dodgy companies do it then it doesn't make it right or even legal. There are plenty of cowboy builders around but it doesn't mean it's fine to be one of them. The companies who practise such shady tactics deserve to be named and shamed in public.

Rosetta Stone is on my list to never buy from. My mom had a *brand new* copy of their Spanish software, in the original box, never opened with the security seals still intact. (If I remember right, it was a gift she bought for someone but it turned out they already had it; she waited too long and couldn't return it to the store.)

Anyway, she had it up for like 50% of the retail price. They filed a counterfeit claim. She could prove it was real (had the receipt), then they said it was against their EULA to resell it. You know, the EULA that's inside the sealed box. The one she could have never possibly agreed to.

She's been on eBay since 1999 with a 100% seller rating. She's sold hundreds of thousands of dollars of vintage kitchenware and designer leather goods with basically no issues. Of course, eBay sided with Rosetta Stone.

So she bitched up the chain at Rosetta Stone. Initially, they offered her a *credit* for more software. She finally got the CEO's assistant. A week later she had a check for the full retail price of the software. (Which, considering the time she put into it, wasn't worth it. For her, it was about the principle of the thing.)

So, my point is this isn't uncommon behavior on eBay. That doesn't make it any less despicable. That's why most of us have a problem with what Siglent did.

Software EULAs are not enforceable, unless the purchaser has had the opportunity to read them before handing over any money.

This is interesting because the distance selling regulations in the UK which entitles the buyer to return goods, purchased over the Internet within 7 days, doesn't apply to music, DVDs, blurays and software, after the packaging has been opened. Presumably to stop people from buying it, copying/installing it and returning it. The trouble is what happens if after you've read the EULA presented to you on the screen and decided you disagree with it? In such cases you should be entitled to a refund.

[Ian.M]

Software EULAs are not enforceable, unless the purchaser has had the opportunity to read them before handing over any money.

This is interesting because the distance selling regulations in the UK which entitles the buyer to return goods, purchased over the Internet within 7 days, doesn't apply to music, DVDs, blurays and software, after the packaging has been opened. Presumably to stop people from buying it, copying/installing it and returning it. The trouble is what happens if after you've read the EULA presented to you on the screen and decided you disagree with it? In such cases you should be entitled to a refund.

The answer to that is the product activation.  Display the EULA before activation. To activate the product, you have to enter a unique code that came with the product.   It then activates online, or via exchange of generated codes by phone or email with a support desk.   If you've activated the product, you are *NOT* entitled to a refund. If you return it for refund before activation, the unique code from it is forever blacklisted, so dishonestly keeping a copy does you no good.  A reasonable 'restocking' charge should be made, which in most cases is simply the cost of the box manuals and media, as its easier to destroy them than to generate a new unique code and repack them.

Better yet: put a QR code on the box with the legend "Visit the product page for info, specs, compatibility and EULA", and also give a URL.

[Zero999]

Wouldn't it be easier to simply put a copy of the EULA on the seller's checkout page with a tick box saying you've read and agree with the EULA which needs to be ticked before allowing the transaction to take place in the first place?

[Ian.M]

Sure, but you try getting all 3rd party sellers to do that.   Unless a cabinet level government official has been personally offended by a sealed EULA, and is willing to promote legislation making it an offence to fail to offer to display the EULA before checkout, it just isn't going to happen.  Getting a EULA link on the packaging voluntarily adopted by a significant proportion of the market would be hard enough. 

[GNU_Ninja]

When was the last time anyone bought software on a DVD/CD (games excluded)? Read and agree to the EULA before purchase, downloading, and activation   

I don't actually have a DVD/CD on any of my computers 

[rickv14623]

Interesting the paths this has taken. Also interesting the OP has not been on this thread in a month or more even with folks now saying his issue was bs.

Just saying

[Rasz]

Software EULAs are not enforceable, unless the purchaser has had the opportunity to read them before handing over any money.

Software EULAs are TOILET PAPER period .. in EU
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=124564&doclang=EN

TLDR: Exhaustion of rights
cited from some random lawyer website: "The principle of exhaustion of rights is well-established in European intellectual property law: if I buy a physical product in the EU which contains copyright-protected material, such as a book or a CD-Rom, the copyright owner cannot stop me re-selling the product to somebody else. In the Usedsoft case, the key question was whether this principle extends to a perpetual licence of downloaded software."

You can even sell oem windows copy you got with a laptop. This is why Microsoft moved to digital licenses with Win10, Now they claim there is no sale, MS merely borrows you the right to use win10 and license is tracked on microsoft servers, there are no activation keys.

Interesting the paths this has taken. Also interesting the OP has not been on this thread in a month or more even with folks now saying his issue was bs.

probably part of the free scope deal was to shut up, just like in stupid US every settlement comes with "we pay you $$$ while you agree it wasnt our fault"

[Zero999]

Interesting the paths this has taken. Also interesting the OP has not been on this thread in a month or more even with folks now saying his issue was bs.

Just saying

That's most likely because, according to his profile, he hasn't been logged onto this site since 17^th November.