Ebay User Agreement amendment?

[The Less Blob]

I logged on to ebay and was presented with this (among several) amendments to the ebay user agreement:

 

“Content

When providing us with content or posting content using eBay's Services, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any and all copyright, publicity, trademarks, database rights and intellectual property rights you have in the content, in any media known now or in the future. Further, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, you waive your moral rights and promise not to assert such rights against us, our sublicensees or assignees.

You represent and warrant that none of the following infringe any intellectual property right: your provision of content to us, your posting of content using the Services, and our use of such content (including of works derived from it) in connection with the Services.”

 

I feel like they tried this before and there was a stink because if you read it literally, let's say you are an artist who sells your work on ebay, does this mean that by posting the image of your work in a listing you just gave ebay a royalty free right to use (and sublicense) your work as they see fit?

 

Has this been discussed somewhere. Has ebay come out and said what they actually mean by this? I understand some things might make sense, like if they want to post a picture of your auction in an advertisement showing what sort of stuff is on ebay, but the right to sublicense??

 

[Dr. Balls]

I logged on to ebay and was presented with this (among several) amendments to the ebay user agreement:

 

“Content

When providing us with content or posting content using eBay's Services, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any and all copyright, publicity, trademarks, database rights and intellectual property rights you have in the content, in any media known now or in the future. Further, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, you waive your moral rights and promise not to assert such rights against us, our sublicensees or assignees.

You represent and warrant that none of the following infringe any intellectual property right: your provision of content to us, your posting of content using the Services, and our use of such content (including of works derived from it) in connection with the Services.”

 

I feel like they tried this before and there was a stink because if you read it literally, let's say you are an artist who sells your work on ebay, does this mean that by posting the image of your work in a listing you just gave ebay a royalty free right to use (and sublicense) your work as they see fit?

 

Has this been discussed somewhere. Has ebay come out and said what they actually mean by this? I understand some things might make sense, like if they want to post a picture of your auction in an advertisement showing what sort of stuff is on ebay, but the right to sublicense??

 

There are lots of websites with similarly-worded provisions in their user agreement, and I think it's basically a blanket cover-your- statement, more than them trying to hijack someone's rights. I've had my art on Ebay for 16 years, and I am not concerned that they are going to get into the art business - one, because it doesn't fit their business model and two, because there isn't much you can do with a 72DPI image anyway.

[Buzzetta]

I filled out an email survey for them last night. I had a few things to say just in case they choose to listen (which I doubt). My feeling is that the above amendment to the user agreement is not to focus in so much on infringing artist rights but rather to feel free to adopt any policy that is inspired by looking at your listing.

 

Say you have a personal policy that you put into your listing such as describing the size box that you will use or how you will ship. (Which is what my survey was about.) If they like that idea and decide to make it policy across their site, then they are free to do that without crediting you or compensating you for the idea since it is part of the user agreement.

 

 

[The Less Blob]

I logged on to ebay and was presented with this (among several) amendments to the ebay user agreement:

 

“Content

When providing us with content or posting content using eBay's Services, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any and all copyright, publicity, trademarks, database rights and intellectual property rights you have in the content, in any media known now or in the future. Further, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, you waive your moral rights and promise not to assert such rights against us, our sublicensees or assignees.

You represent and warrant that none of the following infringe any intellectual property right: your provision of content to us, your posting of content using the Services, and our use of such content (including of works derived from it) in connection with the Services.”

 

I feel like they tried this before and there was a stink because if you read it literally, let's say you are an artist who sells your work on ebay, does this mean that by posting the image of your work in a listing you just gave ebay a royalty free right to use (and sublicense) your work as they see fit?

 

Has this been discussed somewhere. Has ebay come out and said what they actually mean by this? I understand some things might make sense, like if they want to post a picture of your auction in an advertisement showing what sort of stuff is on ebay, but the right to sublicense??

 

There are lots of websites with similarly-worded provisions in their user agreement, and I think it's basically a blanket cover-your- statement, more than them trying to hijack someone's rights. I've had my art on Ebay for 16 years, and I am not concerned that they are going to get into the art business - one, because it doesn't fit their business model and two, because there isn't much you can do with a 72DPI image anyway.

 

My concern is less about ebay doing it themselves, but selling a sublicense to some entity that then has carte blanche to use these images how they see fit. 99% may be of no use to them, but maybe the entity thinks that some of them are worth appropriating.

 

believe it or not there are ebay artists (not gallery artists selling their $5000 paintings on ebay) who have had their work appropriated...like turned into a light switch cover or whatever...and then sold on ebay!! (not by ebay or a sublicensee, just by some rip-off jerk)

 

perhaps it is the lawyer in me being paranoid, but if i saw that provision in a contract for a client I would be all "WTF????"

[Dr. Balls]

Maybe you're right - it all sounds pretty dicey, and you bring up a good point with the light switch/Tchotchke krap. I don't think artists face as much of the problem as celebrities/famous people do - Twitter has the same type of agreement, so what's to stop Twitter from selling Ebay a photo of Kim Kardashian from her feed, and then Ebay selling that photo to a guy who makes light switches? Nothing!

 

Except for Kim Kardashian has enough money to battle Ebay's lawyers. Unfortunately, artists do not - and the cost of enforcing the copyright is generally too great to go after damages.

 

I don't think FB, Twitter or Ebay has done anything yet - but these user agreements are in place for a reason. Maybe we will see it in use someday soon - and see what kind of backlash follows it.

[Ares]

Either that or they are looking for explicit permission for them to host your images on their site without getting sue for copyright

[DougC]

We had a disclaimer/user agreement in this same vain for a former employer. The idea behind was to protect ourselves from litigation for using non-specific sample pictures that were posted in banner or advertising adds.

 

I "assume" this would be the same for ebay's interactive banners that use pictures from your auctions and by adding the above language you can not try to sue them for using your copyrighted pictures for their website promotion.

[The Less Blob]

Either that or they are looking for explicit permission for them to host your images on their site without getting sue for copyright

 

yes, but why do they need to sublicense it? why can't it just say "by posting images on ebay you give ebay permission to host these images on ebay"?

[Ares]

Either that or they are looking for explicit permission for them to host your images on their site without getting sue for copyright

 

yes, but why do they need to sublicense it? why can't it just say "by posting images on ebay you give ebay permission to host these images on ebay"?

 

Cause ebay may not host the images.They might be hosted on a third party site.

In today's world the language needs to be very explicit in permission

[The Less Blob]

fair nuff. i'm not that worried, i just found the language overbearinfg

[Calamerica]

I filled out an email survey for them last night. I had a few things to say just in case they choose to listen (which I doubt). My feeling is that the above amendment to the user agreement is not to focus in so much on infringing artist rights but rather to feel free to adopt any policy that is inspired by looking at your listing.

 

Say you have a personal policy that you put into your listing such as describing the size box that you will use or how you will ship. (Which is what my survey was about.) If they like that idea and decide to make it policy across their site, then they are free to do that without crediting you or compensating you for the idea since it is part of the user agreement.

 

 

+1

[Calamerica]

I logged on to ebay and was presented with this (among several) amendments to the ebay user agreement:

 

“Content

When providing us with content or posting content using eBay's Services, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicensable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise any and all copyright, publicity, trademarks, database rights and intellectual property rights you have in the content, in any media known now or in the future. Further, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, you waive your moral rights and promise not to assert such rights against us, our sublicensees or assignees.

You represent and warrant that none of the following infringe any intellectual property right: your provision of content to us, your posting of content using the Services, and our use of such content (including of works derived from it) in connection with the Services.”

 

I feel like they tried this before and there was a stink because if you read it literally, let's say you are an artist who sells your work on ebay, does this mean that by posting the image of your work in a listing you just gave ebay a royalty free right to use (and sublicense) your work as they see fit?

 

Has this been discussed somewhere. Has ebay come out and said what they actually mean by this? I understand some things might make sense, like if they want to post a picture of your auction in an advertisement showing what sort of stuff is on ebay, but the right to sublicense??

 

There are lots of websites with similarly-worded provisions in their user agreement, and I think it's basically a blanket cover-your- statement, more than them trying to hijack someone's rights. I've had my art on Ebay for 16 years, and I am not concerned that they are going to get into the art business - one, because it doesn't fit their business model and two, because there isn't much you can do with a 72DPI image anyway.

 

My concern is less about ebay doing it themselves, but selling a sublicense to some entity that then has carte blanche to use these images how they see fit. 99% may be of no use to them, but maybe the entity thinks that some of them are worth appropriating.

 

believe it or not there are ebay artists (not gallery artists selling their $5000 paintings on ebay) who have had their work appropriated...like turned into a light switch cover or whatever...and then sold on ebay!! (not by ebay or a sublicensee, just by some rip-off jerk)

 

perhaps it is the lawyer in me being paranoid, but if i saw that provision in a contract for a client I would be all "WTF????"

 

+1