to protect uncompetitive commercial practices at the expense of consumer choice and the livelihood of law-abiding sellers that eBay empowers every day . '' She said eBay intended to appeal the ruling . The case pit two pillars of their industries -- one old , one new -- in a country whose courts often challenge Internet companies on matters protected elsewhere by freedom of speech . The ruling faulted eBay for `` guilty negligence '' for not doing enough to prevent fake goods from being sold on its site . The court also ruled that eBay was responsible for the `` illicit sale '' of perfumes from the LVMH empire , which can be sold only through the brands ' `` selective distribution networks . '' The court barred eBay from running ads for the perfume and cosmetic brands or face a fine of $ 79,000 per day . Heather McDonald , partner at law firm Baker Hostetler , said : `` eBay has policies and procedures in place where they will intervene in an action between a buyer and seller if there 's a problem , and they profit directly on the basis of every item that is sold
-LRB- CNN -RRB- -- A Paris court has ordered eBay to pay $ 63 million damages to luxury goods company LVMH for allowing copies of its goods to be sold on the Web auction site . Louis Vuitton took eBay to court for selling a range of fake luxury goods online . The fashion company -- home to brands including Louis Vuitton , Givenchy , Fendi , Emilio Pucci and Marc Jacobs -- complained it had been hurt by the sale of fake products on eBay . Pierre Godet , an adviser to LVMH Chairman and CEO Bernard Arnault , said the court 's decision was `` an answer to a particularly serious question , on whether the Internet is a free-for-all for the most hateful , parasitic practices . '' eBay said LVMH was trying to crack down on Internet auctions because it was uncomfortable with its business model , which puts sellers rather than brands in control . `` If counterfeits appear on our site , we take them down swiftly , '' eBay spokeswoman Sravanthi Agrawal said . `` But today 's ruling is not about counterfeits . Today 's ruling is about an attempt by LVMH