‘Monopoly’ Suit by Sellers March 06, 2010, 12:03 AM EST More From Businessweek
* EBay Persuades Judge to End Auction ‘Monopoly’ Suit (Update2) * Citigroup Judge to Rule by April on EMI Suit Site (Update2) * EchoStar, MVS to Buy Mexico Satellite Operator Satmex (Update1) * China’s ‘Latent Risk’ Rising in Country’s Banks, Wen Jiabao Say * German Manufacturing Orders Rebound on Rising Investment Demand
Story Tools
* e-mail this story * print this story * digg this * save to del.icio.us
By Andrew M. Harris
March 6 (Bloomberg) -- EBay Inc., operator of the most visited U.S. e-commerce site, no longer faces a lawsuit by three sellers claiming it monopolizes the online auctions market and the means to pay for goods bought there.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel in San Jose, California, ruled the sellers failed to show that they -- or anyone else -- had been injured by EBay’s alleged behavior.
“Plaintiffs have not drawn the court’s attention to any actual proof of antitrust injury caused by EBay,” Fogel said in his March 4 decision throwing out the case.
EBay was accused in the suit of anticompetitive behavior, including the acquisition of the PayPal peer-to-peer payment service in 2002. Paypal, bought by San Jose-based EBay for $1.18 billion, processed more than 40 percent of the $52 billion in merchandise sold on EBay in 2006, the year before Michael Malone of Texas first filed the lawsuit.
Malone was forced to pay “artificially inflated and supracompetitive fees to EBay,” according to a consolidated complaint filed in May 2007.
The sellers sought class-action, or group status, and a finding that EBay violated antitrust laws and illegally restrained trade, plus an award for unspecified money damages.
“We are gratified that the court rejected plaintiffs’ claim as baseless,” EBay Deputy General Counsel Mary Huser said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. “With this meritless suit behind us, we can continue to focus on our core business of providing platforms that bring buyers and sellers together to transact online.”
Michael McShane, lead attorney for the sellers, didn’t immediately return a phone message seeking comment yesterday.
No Line Crossed
“Plaintiffs challenge virtually everything that EBay has ever done,” the company said in court papers asking Fogel to throw out the lawsuit. “Every one of the acts identified by plaintiffs crosses no antitrust line.”
The case is In Re EBay Seller Antitrust Litigation, 07-cv-01882, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).
--With assistance by Karen Gullo in San Francisco. Editors: Peter Blumberg, Michael Hytha.
-0- Mar/06/2010 05:01 GMT
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew M. Harris in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: David E. Rovella at drovella@bloomberg.net.
‘Monopoly’ Suit by Sellers
ReplyDeleteMarch 06, 2010, 12:03 AM EST
More From Businessweek
* EBay Persuades Judge to End Auction ‘Monopoly’ Suit (Update2)
* Citigroup Judge to Rule by April on EMI Suit Site (Update2)
* EchoStar, MVS to Buy Mexico Satellite Operator Satmex (Update1)
* China’s ‘Latent Risk’ Rising in Country’s Banks, Wen Jiabao Say
* German Manufacturing Orders Rebound on Rising Investment Demand
Story Tools
* e-mail this story
* print this story
* digg this
* save to del.icio.us
By Andrew M. Harris
March 6 (Bloomberg) -- EBay Inc., operator of the most visited U.S. e-commerce site, no longer faces a lawsuit by three sellers claiming it monopolizes the online auctions market and the means to pay for goods bought there.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel in San Jose, California, ruled the sellers failed to show that they -- or anyone else -- had been injured by EBay’s alleged behavior.
“Plaintiffs have not drawn the court’s attention to any actual proof of antitrust injury caused by EBay,” Fogel said in his March 4 decision throwing out the case.
EBay was accused in the suit of anticompetitive behavior, including the acquisition of the PayPal peer-to-peer payment service in 2002. Paypal, bought by San Jose-based EBay for $1.18 billion, processed more than 40 percent of the $52 billion in merchandise sold on EBay in 2006, the year before Michael Malone of Texas first filed the lawsuit.
Malone was forced to pay “artificially inflated and supracompetitive fees to EBay,” according to a consolidated complaint filed in May 2007.
The sellers sought class-action, or group status, and a finding that EBay violated antitrust laws and illegally restrained trade, plus an award for unspecified money damages.
ReplyDelete“We are gratified that the court rejected plaintiffs’ claim as baseless,” EBay Deputy General Counsel Mary Huser said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. “With this meritless suit behind us, we can continue to focus on our core business of providing platforms that bring buyers and sellers together to transact online.”
Michael McShane, lead attorney for the sellers, didn’t immediately return a phone message seeking comment yesterday.
No Line Crossed
“Plaintiffs challenge virtually everything that EBay has ever done,” the company said in court papers asking Fogel to throw out the lawsuit. “Every one of the acts identified by plaintiffs crosses no antitrust line.”
The case is In Re EBay Seller Antitrust Litigation, 07-cv-01882, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).
--With assistance by Karen Gullo in San Francisco. Editors: Peter Blumberg, Michael Hytha.
-0- Mar/06/2010 05:01 GMT
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew M. Harris in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: David E. Rovella at drovella@bloomberg.net.