Versace Counterfeit "Victory" is Disputed by Griffith Suisse Luxury Group

In May, it was widely reported that Versace had won a counterfeit lawsuit against Griffith Suisse Luxury Group after four and a half years of litigation.  Since the announcement, the alleged counterfeiter, Griffith Suisse has disputed Versace's victory stating that the matter was settled "wherein both parties agreed not to pursue legal action against each other."  With respect to the 2011 lawsuit filed against online auction house, eBay over similar matters - that is being appealed after California state trial court dismissed Griffith Suisse claims.  Read Griffith Suisse's statement after the jump.

Griffith Suisse Luxury Group's statement:

Griffith-Suisse Luxury Group has released a statement refuting announcements by the Versace Group that it had won a court victory in a counterfeit case in Northern California against them after 4 years.  

On the contrary, it was Griffith Suisse Luxury Group who first initiated the lawsuit against Versace and Ebay in 2008. Versace was alleged to have abused its VERO rights by instructing Bay to take down multiple of Griffith-Suisse Luxury Group’s listings even though they were evidently all authentic.  Ebay took the listings down without the required NOIC (Notice of Claimed Infringement), clearly abetting the luxury brand’s attempt to control the market by removing goods without evidence or basis.  As a matter of fact, eBay has not been able to produce a single properly filled out NOIC document for any luxury items de-listed on Griffith-Suisse Luxury Group’s eBay account.  It is obvious that eBay has been making biased decisions in favor of the luxury brands at the detriment of it’s own sellers.  

Ms. Lara Griffith reiterates their Company’s firm stand on the matter, “As far as we are concerned, Griffith Suisse-Luxury Group, did not sell any counterfeit Versace items on it’s eBay account. The settlement with Versace was a mutual one, wherein both parties agreed not to pursue legal action against each other." 

The case against eBay is still in the process of being appealed. If the appeal is successful the public will be able to hear the testimony of former TSAM (Top Seller Account Manager), Adam Smit who stated that at that time, “eBay’s Top management acted like Gods” in regard to determining what to do with it’s members.  It will be very interesting to see what else this former eBay employee will reveal about the inner workings of eBay’s top management when he is called to testify against them.

The entire 2011 complaint against eBay can be found here.

Further, Griffith Suisse provided us with more insight to their company and to what lead to these lawsuits, as well an inside look at the enforcement of eBay's VeRO policies which allows third parties who hold certain intellectual property rights to report listings that infringe on their rights.  

The GRIFFITH-SUISSE LUXURY GROUP OF COMPANIES was established in 1997. Unlike most companies that are moved only by the dollar bill, Mr. Griffith saw this business as a means to help the poorest in society.  The Company dedicated part of its profits to the Tuloy sa don Bosco Street Children’s Village in the Republic of the Philippines and at one point became its largest benefactor. As the years went by, the Company became one of the leading sources of Fine Hand carved Traditional Furniture in the Philippines. In 2003 the Company expanded into the United States.  The Company joined eBay USA in 2004 and started auctioning fine Luxury Furniture under their own brand names, Georgian Lane, Dominic Gerard and J Emmanuel.  It was their belief that eBay provided them with a worldwide audience to whom they could successfully market and advertise their products. By late 2005 eBay became the Corporation’s leading marketing and selling medium in the USA, encompassing 85% of all United States retail sales and reaching numerous clients worldwide. The response of the eBay community was very encouraging and through the dedicated assistance and insightful suggestions of their eBay Titanium Account Manager Adam Smit, the Company began diversifying into selling other luxury items.  All this was based on a brilliant suggestion by their Titanium manager that “in order to catch a BIG Fish, you should throw out a LITTLE Fish”.  Embracing this concept, their Chairman invested in various Brand name products such as Rolls Royce, Bentley, Louis Vuitton, Hermes, Versace, AT DuPont, Maitland Smith, Cartier, Rolex and countless others in order to sell on eBay in conjunction with their own luxury products.  Versace was a particularly favored brand because they were entering the Home Furnishings sector and many of their accessories greatly complemented the Fine Mahogany Furniture.  The idea worked well, The Company, under the eLuxuryGroup user name was bringing in Clients for their own Luxury Furniture Brands through the sale of smaller value Luxury Brand items. Because of the vast amount of products listed, over 3 Million unique visitors viewed their auctions a year on average. Most buyers did not expect to receive such quality furniture from an eBay Seller and were absolutely amazed with their products when they arrived.  The problems began in 2006, when numerous of the company’s items were de-listed on eBay due to alleged VeRo Infringement.  The Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) Program was set up by eBay in order comply with the Digital Millennium Act. It was created so that intellectual property owners could easily report listings that infringe their rights. But this whole VeRo de-listing matter was very unclear because the Company made sure everything it was selling was authentic.  It was in Company’s best interests to ensure everything sold was authentic because ultimately, the main goal was to sell the furniture and listing the luxury goods was only a means to do that. Mr. Griffith frustratingly told their (TSAM) Top Seller’s Account Manager, Adam Smit that he could not understand why so many of their items were still being de-listed.  In November 6, 2006, the Company’s account was again suspended by eBay due to multiple de-listings by VeRo member, Versace who through eBay, took out each and every single one of Versace’s product off the site.  This was alarming news because not only were there hundreds of items removed, but they were accused of selling counterfeit goods – something the Company vehemently denied.  The Company offered to send Versace the items to prove the goods were all authentic. Most were purchased at “OFF FIFTH”, a Saks fifth Avenue Outlet, where the Company purchased the goods at 70% off its price.  We found out during the discovery process of the case that eBay could not produce a single properly filled out NOCI form yet they de-listed the items anyway. Oddly enough, just when they needed him the most, long time titanium account manager Adam Smit, unexpectedly told Mr. Griffith that he was resigning from eBay to join another Company.  The Company’s eBay account was assigned a new account manager by the name of Kelley Vance, who said “Their hands were tied” and that this problem was now solely between the VeRo Member and the Company - totally out of eBay’s hands.  Unfortunately, despite numerous attempts to contact them, to the point of even hiring lawyers to try to reach them, the VeRo accusers proved to be indifferent or uncooperative.  Kelly said in one e-mail that she did not really have any pointers to give us how to go about it.  She also said in another e-mail that “they (Versace) is not required to give eBay any specific information”;“Bay cannot make Versace accountable”.  Apparently,  VeRo members are given the right NOT to reply at all.  The Company was so desperate that it even promised Vero Members that they would no longer list any other item except their own furniture so long as they can get reinstated but it was all to no avail.    S.T. DuPont was the only one who responded and they told the company that they would only agree to write eBay a letter of reinstatement if an agreement can be signed stating only 3 pieces of St. DuPont items will be listed at a time. According to their lawyers, the infringement eLuxurgroup committed was due to the excessive quantity of items sold and the venue in which the goods were sold, all of which was detrimental to their “brand image”. Although the company does understand the necessity of a VeRo program, in fact it greatly appreciates and encourages the protection it seeks to provide, it cannot accept the unfair and unbalanced policies nor the abuse it promotes.  So long as the eBay VeRo program does not require accusers to answer for their allegations when they are challenged, there is no justice nor fairness in the System.  EBay’s policies are unjust and biased policies that are in fact pro-Vero and anti-seller.  Despite numerous pleadings for help, Kelley Vance purposely concealed the option of using a “counter notice” (DMCA Act), which would require eBay to re-list all the items by law if not contested. Adam Smit, prior to resigning mentioned it only once but at the same time gravely discouraged its use. eBay’s VeRO policies are blatantly biased. In a recent statement, Adam Smit (former TSAM) admitted that at that time, eBay’s Top Management Acted like GODS! Since when in the United States is someone permanently sentenced on the basis of a baseless accusation, especially when the accuser is suddenly nowhere to be found – or worse, is not even required to prove the veracity of their accusations?  Suddenly, eBay who first enticed and encouraged their member, to invest lots of money into growing their eBay business is totally abandoned by them saying there was absolutely nothing they could do to help the situation because of the unproven word of a 3^rdparty, not even involved in the transaction in the first place.   eBay will on one hand say that they are in no position to determine the authenticity of any item sold therefore leaving that responsibility solely to their VeRo members but on the other hand will tell that seller that the reason for their permanent suspension is because they are selling too may counterfeit goods.  How is it that they can suddenly be able to determine the goods to be counterfeit as fact? Does that not sound contradictory? It is almost as if eBay conspired with Versace to deliberately kill the seller’s account. Apparently there is truth to this because a letter was discovered addressed to eBay from Versace in Milan, Italy asking eBay to do precisely that – de-list EVERYTHING andsuspend the seller.  eBay simply just followed was what Versace wanted from the beginning without question, totally disregarding the NOCI Policies requiring the VeRo Member to sign under the penalty of perjury. Even Versace later admitted under penalty of perjury that they did not send any official NOCI (Notice of Claimed Infringement) to eBay at that time, implying it was eBay that violated their own policies. eBay made it effortless for Versace or any VeRo member to abuse its program.  It seems that eBay’s Vero program is a “Guilty first until proven innocent” program that is grossly in favor of its Vero members, turning over to these Big Companies the SOLE power and right to re-instate an accused seller so long as they conform to their demands (as with ST. Dupont). It is unjust for eBay to be allowed to enforce a policy that does not give sellers any recourse to redeem themselves from false accusations. It is obviously “unfair business practice” because it does not give a person the RIGHT to a FAIR hearing.  EBay’s Vero Program promotes the environment wherein VeRo Members can very easily abuse their authority to de-list items for other self-motivated intentions other than legitimate copyright/trademark infringement issues without having to answer to anyone for it. This is evident in the reply of ST DuPont when they stated that the reason for their de-listings is not a matter of authenticity but a matter of quantity, brand image and venue.  The reality is that some companies do not want their products sold on eBay at all and the Vero program makes it especially easy for them to do so without any real consequence. But as if that was not enough damage inflicted by eBay on our Company; Apart from unfairly suspending the company’s main selling account, eBay then added insult to injury by hosting and publishing the malicious contents of an eBay Forum (lasting several months) containing numerous defamatory statements which further harmed the Company’s reputation as well as the reputation of its chairman, Mr. Griffith before the entire eBay Community and the broader community of the worldwide web. This forum ridiculed, scorned and bred contempt for the Company by personally attacking its chairman, Mr. Griffith by way of generating untruthful attacks on character through malevolent insinuations, derogatory statements, lies, and wishing harm against his person and the Corporation.  November 12, 2006 Mrs. Griffith’s brother through another account called GroupdeLuxe, tried to post a message of explanation and assurance to Clients in the forum, but his post was immediately taken out by Susan of the Trust and safety department claiming that it is against eBay’s policy to post a message about a “no longer registered member”.  Clearly she should have taken out the forum right then and there because the title of the forum in itself, “eLuxuryGroup, no longer a registered member” was obviously a violation based on her own words.  This removal of GroupdeLuxe’s message is undeniable proof that eBay’s Trust and Safety Department was well aware of existence of the Forum and its contents and yet they did not protect the suspended eBay member by taking it out even though it was reported to their Account Manager, Kelley Vance.  The forum in itself along with its entire decorum was clearly AGAINST eBay Policies and yet eBay allowed it to progress into a deliberate character assassination by scornful individuals who continued to worsen for several months still. In fact, eBay encouraged participation in this destructive Community Forum by disseminating these defamatory statements via e-mail, message-forwarding systems. The Forum was also made easily accessible to general public access through search engines.  Since the only information eBay was willing to give the general public was the statement “NO LONGER A REGISTERED USER”. Clients who had pending orders upon seeing this notice began panicking and there was a sudden surge in Credit Card Charge backs and PayPal Refunds. It was this very forum, which alarmed majority of eLuxuryGroup Clients and created the false notion that the company was a big “SCAM” and that everybody should try and get their money back immediately.  This forum triggered rampant charge backs and refunds for goods that were already exported out of the Plant and within the shipping company’s possession.   Without any voice, the company did not have a means good enough to directly dispute the rumors and assure Clients that these lies were totally false and that the company would continue to make every effort to honor all its commitments.  Mr. Griffith tried his best to assure the community through e-mail messages about the integrity and stability of the business and the Company’s intent to supply all furniture obligations, but eBay’s ban on communication leaving only the forum’s devastatingly negative influence on clients made the situation so severe and that the financial damage inflicted became irrecoverable.  It became so brutal that the rumors did ring true after all, and the Company was literally forced on its knees with money pouring out unceasingly, so much so that eventually there was no money left.  Mr. Griffith was literally forced try to find a way to log in and report the forum to eBay’s Trust and Safety department, even giving them the links and e-mailing the actual pages but three times they denied it was them hosting it and said it was some sort of “spoof” website – not eBay.  We cannot believe that after conducting their own investigation, eBay’s Trust and safety department is so incompetent that they cannot even tell the difference between a “spoof” and what is genuine within their very own website - three times it was reported to them and three times they denied the obvious.  Then after a day or so, suddenly it was taken out by eBay. No admission, No apology… just gone as if nothing happened. But after all that damage, did eBay according to their own policies reprimand any of these members for their actions?  Was anybody even warned? suspended?  The damages eBay’s gross negligence and unfair business practices have caused Company and the Griffith Family is unquantifiable.  The Griffith family spent many years training their staff until they reached the skill levels necessary to make some of the finest furniture produced today.  Each long time employee, most of whom worked for Mr. Griffith’s parents, was important to the Company which was more like a family.  Because of eBay, these old friends find themselves out of work after so many years of loyal service - no amount of money can buy that back.  This is why in a last ditch effort to try and save jobs and provide payroll for their suffering employees for Christmas, Mrs. Griffith sent a letter of appeal to eBay and VeRo, hoping that somehow, if they promise not to list any items except their own, their account could get reinstated - but this plea for mercy it fell on deaf ears. In fact the reply was so cold that they even mentioned not to bother writing to them again. It was absolutely heartless especially after all the damage they had done! Mr. and Mrs. Griffith with their own life savings, hard work, blood, sweat and tears built up their Company from what little they had.  They believed they could make a better life and so invested into the United States, “The Land of Opportunity”.  The hope and the dream was to possibly make a better life for themselves, for all the Street Children in the Philippines and to make a better life for all their employees.  The mere fact that the Brands they promoted even bear Mr. Dominic Griffiths own name and the name of his only son means that they valued it tremendously.  They put enormous effort, time and energy into building up their company’s reputation.  It was the one legacy they wanted to leave their son.  Can you imagine how horrible it was for them to see it dragged through the mud and riddled with insinuations and lies?  People everywhere were saying they were a big SCAM. What this family treasured most and protected most dearly was the very thing eBay destroyed. “It doesn't happen often, but occasionally there is misuse on eBay. Should misuse occur, Safe Harbor springs into action and tries to resolve issues related to fraud, trading offenses, and illegally listed items.” EBay will advertise and promote that eBay is “SAFE”.   This experience shows us otherwise.  How can eBay be “Safe” when their policies reflect UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES and their Trust and Safety Team cannot even tell the difference between what is real and a spoof within their own website.  It has been almost 5 years now since the case was first taken to the Santa Clara County Court in 2008.  Summary judgment was recently awarded in favor of eBay on the grounds of upholding the “USER AGREEMENT” - an unconscionable agreement that you cannot avoid. Even if you do not agree with it, you are given no choice – it is this unconscionable agreement that gives eBay its power to “act like gods”.  You would hope that our numerous motions in accordance with the law would win over an unconscionable user agreement like that, but apparently not.  Anyway, we are still fighting and hope that someone would see the reality of the damage eBay has done and continues to do.  May our appeal that we are about to file find its way to open minds who will listen to the plea, not just for our sake but for the sake of the hundreds who have been unjustly treated by bullies in big business who think they can get away with anything.

Readers, what do you think?