I can’t understand this from a data processing point of view. Surely the flag database tracks that an item was already flagged and removed, in order to avoid duplicates.
Also the seller is perhaps at fault for not naming it wisely?
Cache invalidation and naming stuff..
And “I guess, eventually” is generally not good enough for a court, which is really where this person should be able to send a dispute like this.
It's not the press of choice for drug baron king pins.
A sword which has been beaten into a plowshare is no longer a sword, and an inoperative 140 year old pill press is no longer a pill press.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/ebay-pay-59-million-settle-co...
Their treatment of this seller sucks, but they are also forced to cover their asses by the government on this. So they are in a somewhat difficult position.
I'm not defending eBay, mind you. As the seller notes on their Twitter thread... eBay should and could easily detect this kind of illegal item AHEAD OF TIME when the seller enters the item description. Just block the seller from listing the item, rather than letting them list it... and then banning them later.
It is possible (don't know how likely) that maybe eBay is being total overkill on this stuff as a sign of good faith to the government to avoid future fines. A lot of those fines can be based on the perceived level of willful noncompliance. Not excusing them. Just thinking thru what might be happening.
If the device in question is non-functional, I would dispute the "may be used for" requirement of the definition.
After all, you could sell a perfectly functional pill press with a single crucial $.02 screw missing and accurately call it "non functional"
Just to be clear, I'm not saying this justifies the response. I'm just clarifying what may have prompted this serious over-reaction by ebay.
>They do that for BB guns and other items with WAY fewer consequences if you mess up!!
She has a point though. If it's illegal, why even let it get listed in the first place? Why not just give the seller a warning during the listing process?
>Also, if you're going to give someone a lifetime ban for some keywords that AI picks up in a listing title, GIVE YOUR USERS A RED TEXT WARNING BEFORE THEY LIST IT TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE! >They do that for BB guns and other items with WAY fewer consequences if you mess up!!
This is valid reason for enforcement of the rule.
What’s at issue, in all of these cases, is the lack of reasonable judgement of the case (appeal).
eBay’s place in the market (different from, say, Amazon or Walmart) is private sellers selling used items, vintage, collectible, rare, antique. This is exactly what this item is.
No average person would ever conceive of the item as itself being dangerous or harmful (like a gun or brass knuckles).
Whats more, no one would object to selling this antique on eBay to, say, a pharmacy to sit as decoration on a shelf.
On the face of it, it seem unlikely an impartial judge would rule the seller was not a good member of the EBay community, and deserves a restoration of their privileges.
I wish her luck in getting it sorted, ...
That doesn't seem to be a then and now part of this. I looked on Amazon and you can find a pill machine for ~$400 pressing single pills with identical design.