Archive
05-28-2003, 05:54 PM
Posted By: <b>petecld </b><p>Looks like someone was naughty:<BR><BR>(hope this link works)<BR><BR><a href="http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/story.jsp?floc=FF-APO-1700&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20030527%2F183134573.htm&sc=1700" target=_new>http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/story.jsp?floc=FF-APO-1700&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20030527%2F183134573.htm&sc=1700</a>
Archive
05-28-2003, 07:53 PM
Posted By: <b>Botn</b><p>I am far from an eBay hater, as that is the forum in which I sell predominately but it is nice to see that someone can actually "beat" the monster. I write "beat" as it seems based on the article that this will be appealed and has probably cost the plaintiff plenty, if not on a contingency.<BR><BR>Bottom line is that whatever this costs ebay, we will end up paying for it in the long run.<BR>
Archive
05-30-2003, 01:55 AM
Posted By: <b>Adam J. Baxter</b><p>I'd be very surprised if ebay didin't raise thier fees after this. I wonder if this means that the man who sued can open an online auction site using the same setup? If he beat ebay in court over the patent on the setup, I would think that he could, and ebay really couldn't fight it.