Message #5 Posted by Mike on 11 June 2004, 12:27 p.m.,
in response to message #4 by Joe Edwards
"The catch is, can you prove, beyond any question of doubt that those are your photos Mike. Unless there is some type of digital signiture, you really cannot prove that you took them, merely that you had them on your auction first."
Absolutely! I have the original 2272 x 1704 image. I bet he can't produce one. If he simply tried to expand it, it would be obvious. But aside from that, eBay has a backed up database that will show my photo on ebay, before he ever joined.
"My main question is this; why are you even asking folks what their opinions are? Not trying to troll here, but if you have a problem with it and you feel ebay will shut down the other person's auction, report him."
Already did. I'm sure his auction will be pulled. The way I look at it, there is no such thing as only "slightly" violating the rules. There are two issues:
Buyer point of view: No big deal, perhaps.
Seller point of view: This is just as much an abuse of my photos, title and description, as if he used a photo of one of my mint calculators and sold and average calculator. No gray area here.
eBay rules against photo and description theft
But the point you are missing is this is about leveraging off of another persons auctions and expenses. That is the issue. This is a black and white issue. It's no different than if someone used an HP Museum photo to sell their product, without giving credit for the source.
I just bring this up as a general issue. I am fully capable of dealing with it and have.
Edited: 11 June 2004, 12:33 p.m.