Here's what I don't understand and since there are a few lawyers here, maybe they can help. If there can be a pattern shown that there was shilling going on and it was brought to ebay's attention, and if they did nothing about it, couldn't they be considered complicit in that activity? And even more so if this was an ongoing activity across a number of sellers.
I do understand that actual shilling would have to be provable, which is probably the major "rub". But it seems that if enough patterns can be established to bring nefarious activities into question, and ebay actually has better resources to track this (since actually know who the bidders are), it would be in their best interest to crack down harder on bid retractions of this nature. Or are they banking on the assumption that shilling would be extremely difficult to prove?
|