worst sellers on ebay?

I have been overcharged slightly on some items where I was willing to take the hit because I wanted the item. This biggest problem is having my userid registered in Russia but having stuff shipping to the USA. I have a few sellers that flat out state no shipping to Russia and cancel my bids before the auction close until I explain item will ship to the USA

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree, Ebay's system is very flawed. I once won an auction, but couldnt' email (invalid) or phone (disconnected). Nothing else to do. Three weeks later he started posting negs on my comments page, and harrassing people bidding on some of my auctions.

 

Your not right about that. I've spent 5 years lobbying congress about copyright and founded NY Fair Use. Please become familiar with section 106 of the US comerce statutues

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html

and title 17
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17.html

the notorious DMCA

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/dmca1.htm

I strongly adivse you not to make up your own version of copyright law as it has put people in jail, some of whom I know personally. If you don't like the current copyright law (and who the heck does) then tell your Congressman.

Ruben

 

One seller I have a probelm with is Aboncom who sells their own "Star Grading Services" (SGS) coins. Their auctions all appear to look like these coins were indepently graded, whereas it is nothing of the sort. They make NO disclosure that the very people that own SGS coin grading are the same people that own Aboncom.

They prey on "newbies" and make a killing. Amazing, how they take rolls of bank coins, slap MS70 labels on them with a bogus certificate, and people on eBay buy this.

So if you see this slab:



Know very well that this seller OWNS and OPERATES this so called grading service. In other words...RUN!!!

 

Ruben is right....it doesn't have to be pasted across the photo....as long as there is a copyright noted on the site that is stealing....I would suggest if you want that photo to take it to Photoshop and change the look alittle bit....as that will make it yours.

I've also read on this as my sister works in Art and photos.....and from the min. you take a photo or paint a piece of art...that is copy-righted as yours...now I will say that if you don't send in CR info to the Gov you are going to have a hard time getting the money if someone steals it...but the law is the law.

Speedy

 

Speedy, you don't have to have a copyright noted on the site either. Plus I would definitely not recommend doing what you suggest with photoshop. Taking a copyrighted image and altering it to try and avoid the copyright demenstrates that you know you are violating the copyright. And making a slight alteration to the image will not make it yours. (For example if I took a bestselling book, changed the names, slight alteration, and then published it, do you think I could get away with it?) I would recommend just getting permission from the owner of the image to use it. Unless they are a professional photographer they will most likely give you permission free of charge. In some cases they will want a credit byline.

 

Right....I must not have been thinking too well today!

I had a article I wanted to put online but didn't know where to write...I finaly got his name and emailed him and asked if I could re-print it....he never e-mailed back...
So I decided that I would write an article myself...so after reading his article and a few books on the topic and searching it out I did just that....I still gave his article credit at the bottem since some of the % I got from him....

Speedy

 

Not to turn this into a copyright thread, BUT

It says in clear english on the LOC website and I've been told in person by the copyright office at hearings, and my lawyer at EFF that, as a fact, copyright notice has NO BARING on the rights and privledges of a copyright holder. In addition, there is a section on title 17 on "Deritive Works" and it is illegal to take an image and alterate a little (which makes the entire genere of rap music vitural illegal and has caused serious law suites in the music industry).

Legally, you can't do a darn thing with any cultural artifact of the last 100 years except staff at it and use it for politcal satire or parody.

Is this stupid? Yes it is. Call your congressman.

Ruben

 

In other news, i was just looking at the new statue of Pee Wee Reese and Jackie Robinson at Keystone Park in Coney Island. See - Kentucky and Brooklyn are attached at the hip!

Ruben

 

I've had the same discussion with my avitar and this is my 2 cents.

Its a great day for socialism when a picture of a coin, not claimed as one's own, used simply as an avitar on a chat forum, for no other purpose than admiration of said coin, is cause to bring forth links to copyright laws. :high5: :headbang:

If I had scooby-doo or king tut's maks, as my avitar I bet no one would even blink.

:computer: :computer: :desk: :desk: :goofer: :goofer:

 

That would be a violation of copyright AND trademark laws. I only mentioned it because it was said in the thread. I repeat, yes you can go to jail for using an image, even as an avatar. And I agree that it is crazy. So call your congressman and complain, because HE/SHE is responsibile for the stupidity.

Ruben

 

nod. read through "Ruben Quotes" and understand your motive. Thanks for looking out for us

 

hey zane i got a couple of those sgs coins/olders on ebay too. it was a lot auction(they listed every coin an had pics. not a grab bag) and i paid the value of one of the non graded coins for the whole lot,so no money lost.when the coins came in i laughed, all the sgs were pf70 and ms70. one was a 1988 penny with a big finger print mart that has turned black.

 

Ruben " I repeat, yes you can go to jail for using an image,"
could you imagine being the arresting officer for somthing like that. lol

 

It has happened..

Can you imagine sueing a 12 year old girl for recording music or the girl scouts getting sued for singing "Happy Birthday"

Ruben

 

Ive stated that already if its noted on there sight (copy rights).People all over the world snag photos and post !!!!!Like I said, if someone really wants to protect, own, defend, fight for,copyright, pay lawyers for a simple little photo of a coin, (That they should be proud, and should have blocked the photo) that someones enjoying,Lock me-up!, Iam darn poor anyway........... :whistle:Also, that sight I got the photo from is for collectors to enjoy!.

 

I'm not making a moral judgement. But as far as the lawyers go, they are already paid for. If you end on the the wrong end of legal action because of stupidity, you'll be doing a lot less whistling past the grave yard and a lot more cursing. Trust me, I'd sat in court rooms with people nerously twitching, telling me exactly what your saying, while facing huge fines and potentional jail sentences.

Ruben

 

Ok, No more photos,so no one post photos on this forum of coins, unless you own them or have permission........(me). :vanish:

 

Now as it is a coin that is genraly available then it could be argued that the coin is in the public domain and hence images of it are too :whistle: there is a difference between downloading illigal music files and distriputing them (Copies for friends etc) and using a photo of a coin otherwise I think a number of us are guilty except me as I own mine LOL as for going to jail for using a avatar any judge that carried out such a sentence would be laughed off the bench, well in the UK at any rate LOL

De Orc

 

http://www.bl.uk/services/information/copyrightfaq.html