 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, this should be a short case as eBay can be held libel for not taking the messages down. However, eBay (and anyone else like Consumer Reports) should be allowed some method to rate people which means that no matter what method is used someone is going to be unhappy.
However, some things to note are that in order to put anything up for auction on eBay you have to consent to having people say both good and bad things about you. Further, while it is true that some people may try to defame someone, it is not eBay's fault but rather those who do make the attempt. Thus, I'd say:
1. The sellor is taking the wrong entity to court. They should have to first prove what the buyer said was incorrect. The sellor has the buyer's name and address and can sue for defamation of character or libel with them.
1a. After filing for a hearing with the buyer, the sellor should have the right to turn to eBay and ask for any comments, ratings, etc... to be suspended for a period of time (such as sixty days) while the trial proceeds.
2. Only if #1 is found in the sellor's favor should the sellor have a right to then turn to eBay and demand the removal of the statements.
3. Only after #2 should the sellor (IMHO) have the right to then file for a hearing if eBay refuses to remove said comments.
4. Of course, should the sellor lose at any of the above, then eBay should be able to retain the comments, ratings, etc... and to have them available to the general public. This is because (IMHO) the general public has the right to know whether or not someone is a good person to deal with or a bad person to deal with.
Remember that secrecy is one of the main tools used by unsavory characters to hide their misdeeds. It isn't the only reason secrecy is used but it is a very large flag to say that something is going on behind your back. And it is usually not to your benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
