Analyzing the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision Not to Review <i>Tiffany v. eBay</i>

In Tiffany v. eBay, 600 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2010), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court's ruling (see, Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v. eBay, Inc., 576 F.Supp.2d 463 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)) in favor of eBay on the key issue of contributory trademark infringement, as well as direct infringement and dilution, but remanded on the issue of false advertising. The upshot of the holding is that despite a general knowledge that a significant percentage of Tiffany goods sold on eBay were counterfeit, eBay did not have a duty to prevent any such sales unless and until a specific instance of fraud was brought to its attention. The fact that eBay did take prompt action after reports and invested in quality control influenced the court to find that eBay was not willfully blind to the existence of counterfeits. (For more on the Second Circuit's ruling, see, “Tiffany v. eBay,” Internet Law & Strategy, May 2010 (www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/issues/ljn_internetlaw/8_5/news/153682-1.html).