Why is it that instead of issuing a “cease and desist” order or a similar warning to the people selling on eBay, that Mary Kay Inc. just went ahead and filed lawsuits against these sellers?
Why didn’t they give these people a chance to stop their selling if they wanted to?
Why didn’t Mary Kay Inc. use the VERO program set up by eBay to address the alleged violations of their trademark and copyright? If sellers were violating these guidelines, set up to protect companies, then Mary Kay Inc. can simply file notice with eBay and the offending listings are removed. Apparently what Mary Kay Inc. is alleging is beyond VERO. If sellers aren’t using copyrighted or trademarked material or images in their listings and not trying to sell counterfeit products, then there isn’t much to dispute with eBay.
But instead of giving these sellers a warning, Mary Kay Inc. brought down the hammer.
If Mary Kay Inc. discovers that their active consultants and directors are selling products to those who then sell it on eBay, then what? Do they terminate those consultants and directors? Do those people then become examples, used to scare future recruits into behaving?
And what responsibility do those buying excess inventory for resell have to check out the person selling it to them? If there were an underground counterfeit TimeWise factory, maybe that would be reasonable. But as it is, all they know is that it is someone who was probably at one time in Mary Kay. Why should those sellers be required to find out if that person is active? Mary Kay Inc. can claim that by purchasing inventory from their active consultants that resellers are interfering with their business. But actually…they may be helping MK’s business: after all, with more room on their shelves, these consultants can now buy more merchandise directly from the company and keep the inventory loading machine rolling.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, no question.