Money laundering and licensing violations: Why is eBay protecting these "Power Sellers
Summary: The discussion revolves around allegations of money laundering and licensing violations against eBay "Power Sellers." Several participants discuss why eBay protects these sellers or does not respond appropriately. The exchange among the participants shows different perspectives and concerns regarding eBay's actions. It develops into a lively dialogue without any clear consensus or solution being found.
Hello everyone,
I have to speak up today about some frustration over a development I’ve noticed on eBay. It’s about the mass sale of Microsoft product keys at prices that defy all logic (e.g. €5 instead of €200).
It’s obvious that these are often unlicensed digital goods or, in the worst case, methods of money laundering. Despite clear reports, customer service often responds with standard replies: “The item does not violate our policies.”
It seems as if these sellers are protected simply because they:
Have an old account with lots of ratings.
Bring in high fees for eBay through the high sales volume.
Is customer service overwhelmed here, or is there a deliberate looking the other way with top sellers? A reputable marketplace should not ignore such practices just because the numbers add up.
What are your experiences with this?
ronnydertankwart
·7 months agoI can only explain the background to you, since I recently bought a Windows key for 39.90 euros. Why did I go for the more expensive option?
The items you mentioned are probably "volume licenses" - a volume license is a cost-effective licensing model for companies and organizations (often from 5 licenses onward) to use software multiple times. It allows centralized management and activation of many workstations with a single key (MAK or KMS), often as perpetual purchase software.
These keys are not intended for end users and, in fact, resale outside these organizations, for which they were originally intended, is also not allowed. Microsoft regularly blocks these keys and, according to Google, also takes action against dealers who resell these volume licenses on a large scale.
I am not familiar with all the legal aspects and possible gray areas of such licenses, however, and therefore cannot assess how Ebay handles this. If they respond that no problem was found, I assume that the seller acquired this key from a legal source.
For me, the risk was not worth saving 30 euros. I now have a nice retail key in my own name, and it is neither reused by dubious sellers, nor does Microsoft simply block it, and even after moving to new hardware or the like, I can reuse the key at any time.
An alternative to the retail key is the OEM key (Original Equipment Manufacturer). These are keys that are usually activated via the motherboard and are only valid once. As a rule, these are used by PC dealers when the buyer has a Windows version preinstalled by them or purchases one along with the PC. These keys are normally completely legitimate and legal too - but unlike the retail version, unfortunately they cannot be reused. If, as a user, you replace the hardware (the motherboard), for example with a new one, then a new license key must also be purchased.
Regards
Timo
lore99l
OP7 months agomany thanks for the factual comparison of retail, OEM, and volume licenses. You are absolutely right: if you buy cheap, you often buy twice, because these keys can be blocked at any time.
However, you write that you assume the source is legal because eBay “did not find a problem.” That is exactly where my criticism lies: eBay does not check the source, only the form. The key point you raise is the volume licenses (MAK/KMS). If a seller offers these thousands of times for €5 and thereby manipulates the shipping method (indicates physical shipping but delivers digitally), that is a systematic violation of the platform rules. That eBay does not intervene here has nothing to do with the legality of the source, but with a failure of the control mechanisms — or with a financial interest in the fees from these mass sellers.
A reputable marketplace should not wait until Microsoft blocks the keys or the buyer becomes an expert in licensing law. If the conditions (price, quantity, shipping method) are so obviously inconsistent, a platform must not turn a blind eye.
Best regards
ttd4it
·7 months agoHere's a small follow-up as well.
MAK keys are typically a purchase and licensing recommendation for companies with up to 50 users that do not want or are unable to operate their own infrastructure for license activation.
Administration is then handled via the Micrososft Admin Center.
However, these MAK keys are currently being offered on various websites, and the number of 50 is likely to be reached very quickly, especially when keys are sold across different domains.
But here too, ebay's hands are tied. This merchant's purchasing transactions fall under trade secrecy.
With KMS keys, things look a little different; Microsoft does officially provide them on the corresponding websites for everyone to see, but the real issue is that the legal keys are then activated with illegal servers.
So it's better to take the official route and let the authorities do the work.
For private customers, the only option left is to look for used OEM or retail licenses (RTL).
ttd4it
·7 months agoStill, the market for used licenses remains a billion-dollar business.
In principle, trading in “used” licenses has not been prohibited since 2012.
However, it also depends on the source. At the moment, I am observing more than 5 companies selling activation keys that are freely available on the internet. A lucrative business.
For legal reasons, I unfortunately cannot provide any hints at the moment as long as investigations and proceedings have not been concluded.
However, there are also websites on the internet that are reputable and then refer to supposed “offers” with not-so-legal content.
For laypeople, such offers are usually not even identifiable.
At present, it is often about Office licenses.
In principle, the recommendation after receiving it remains simply and straightforwardly to check whether the purchased activation key can also be found on social media or via Google.
If the result is positive, one could forward the result to ebay for further review.
Since ebay is not a lawless space, they must then also follow up on the report.
In the final step, a report is then filed with the investigating authorities.
lore99l
OP7 months agoHello @ttd4it,
thanks a lot for your objective assessment and the insight into the current problem with freely available activation keys.
You’re right that trading in used licenses is legal, but that’s exactly where the gray area lies that eBay apparently deliberately doesn’t regulate. My point is: why does the buyer (Laye) have to play detective first, Google the key, or search social media to prove fraud?
If a seller:
states physical shipping but delivers digitally (a clear violation of eBay’s terms and conditions),
sends software links to third-party sites,
and does this in thousands of sales,
then that’s not an "isolated case" that has to be laboriously checked first. That’s a system. The fact that eBay brushes off such reports with stock phrases suggests a level of security to the buyer that doesn’t exist.
It cannot be the community’s job to do the investigative work while eBay collects the fees. A "pro" like you sees the problem, but thousands of casual buyers fall for it and risk their system being locked at some point.
Best regards
ttd4it
·7 months agoHello @lore99l,
the problem with the matter is that for ebay, you don’t have your own investigative powers, as the police and the public prosecutor’s office can use.
The community can only do this task to a limited extent as well. I have outlined the necessary steps.
Of course, as an MS partner (since 1999), after a total of 39 years of IT experience, I see the issue very differently than an individual buyer. But there are actually dealers offering software licenses cheaper than the official MS homepage. The price range can be 20.00 - 30.00 there.
You can also buy licenses from them in a legally secure way. By now, some dealers even have TÜV certification. This documents the purchase and supply chains or transfer. However, the offers are mostly aimed at commercial companies.
As a layperson, you also can’t always tell from the price whether a product has been properly transferred.
Offers under 10.00 € should be questionable. But the range partly also extends to offers for 29.00 and 39.00 €.
In the end, the alternative products have caught up significantly in recent years (Office).
Just because you once learned word processing or spreadsheet calculations with WORD and EXCEL doesn’t mean that other manufacturers couldn’t do the same with their free suites either. (LibreOffice, OnlyOffice etc. pp.). Only the implementation of Outlook is missing.
Whether I use a blank sheet from company A or B. What matters is the content.
For the IT layperson, you could compare it to a car:
The body is the operating system, but what matters are the inner values (applications). Most of the time, these are the applications that make everyday life easier. And from experience I can say that the average user usually only needs 10 - 20.
In that case, it hardly matters anymore which operating system I use. Only in a professional context do products from MS or Adobe play a role for some people.
The private user can still decide freely.
I’m also linking again to the issue with the gray area of "used licenses".
Link: https://www.behoerden-spiegel.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Beschaffung_Software_2021.pdf
lore99l
OP7 months agoHello @ttd4it,
many thanks for your technical addition and the interesting link. Your IT expertise is beyond question, and I agree with you that open-source alternatives would be the better choice for many private users.
However, I would like to clarify one point: I am not saying that eBay should take on the role of the public prosecutor. eBay does have a house right and clear listing guidelines.
In order to determine that a seller is manipulating the shipping method (promising physical shipping but delivering digitally), eBay does not need police investigative powers. This is a technical fact that is visible in its own systems. If eBay ignores such obvious violations of its own terms and conditions, that promotes exactly the gray areas you describe.
Of course there are reputable resellers (with TÜV certification etc.), but they do not sell keys for €5 via manipulated shipping methods. If we as a community accept that "the average user won’t notice anyway" and that eBay therefore does not have to act, we are leaving the marketplace to fraudsters.
It remains the case: A marketplace that profits from the fees of these mass sellers has a moral and contractual duty to sanction obvious rule violations – even without a court order.
Best regards
steffi@ebay
Hello @lore99l, thanks for sharing your observations so openly here. I understand very well that the very low prices for Microsoft product keys are irritating to you – especially when they are clearly below the usual market price. 🤔
In principle, sellers with long-standing accounts or many reviews must also comply with our policies. eBay does not have a “protection status” for so-called power sellers when it comes to violations of laws or our guidelines. Sales volume or fees play no role in the assessment of reported listings.
However, with digital goods – especially license keys – the review is often complex. Whether a listing violates licensing law depends on various factors (e.g. type of license, origin, resale rights within the EU, etc.). Not every very low price automatically means a violation of the rules. That is why reported listings are reviewed individually, which can sometimes come across from the outside as a standard response.
If you see specific listings that seem suspicious to you, reporting them via the relevant function is still the right way to go. Every report is reviewed – even if the result is not always visible or can be communicated in detail. 🔍
It is important to us that buyers and sellers can rely on a fair marketplace that complies with the law. Your feedback helps us stay vigilant and continue improving our processes. 💙
lore99l
OP7 months agoHello @steffi@ebay,
thank you very much for the general explanation, but I have to strongly disagree here. This is not just about the price, but about a combination of obvious policy violations that would lead to immediate suspension for small sellers:
Used argument vs. quantity: A seller cannot declare "thousands" of individual licenses as "used." It is logically impossible for tens of thousands of private individual licenses from legal sources to be available at this price all the time.
Bypassing the rules for digital goods: This seller offers "physical shipping," but actually sends the key by email. That is a deliberate violation of eBay's criteria for selling digital goods and is only meant to circumvent buyer protection or bypass the strict rules for digital products.
Security risk: The messages sent often contain dubious external links for downloading the software, which poses a massive security risk to eBay users.
Suspicion of money laundering: If a product with a market value of €200 is sold thousands of times for €5, the discrepancy is so enormous that it goes beyond a "gray area" and suggests aiding and abetting money laundering or massive license fraud.
If, despite these cumulative violations (manipulated shipping method, questionable origin, security risks), no deletion takes place, the only conclusion left is that sales volume and commissions matter more to eBay here than its own principles.
A marketplace is only as reputable as its moderators. Why is there a double standard here?
steffi@ebay
Hello @lore99l, thanks for your detailed and clear feedback. I can see that this topic is very important to you – and I take your points seriously. 🙏
You are raising several specific aspects: high quantities of supposedly "used" licenses, the discrepancy between physical shipping and actual delivery by email, possible security risks from external links, and the suspicion of structural legal violations.
In principle, this also applies here:
There is no double standard. Sellers – regardless of turnover, status, or number of ratings – are subject to the same eBay policies. If violations are identified, action follows. Sales volume or commissions do not protect anyone from sanctions.
At the same time, assessing such cases is more legally and technically complex than it appears from the outside. For example:
For software licenses, the European principle of exhaustion plays a role. Whether and in what form resale is permitted depends heavily on the individual case.
The question of "physical shipping vs. digital transmission" is reviewed within the framework of our policies. What matters is not only the shipping method, but how the listing is structured overall.
Hints about external links or potential security risks are treated with particular sensitivity, because protecting our users is the priority here. 🔐
What I can understand is that when several factors come together from your perspective, it quickly creates the impression of systematic tolerance. The fact that this impression arises is an important signal for us.
What I do want to say clearly, however:
A blanket accusation that eBay knowingly tolerates money laundering or license fraud for economic reasons does not correspond to the internal review and compliance processes. Such issues are not handled superficially – especially when there are repeated reports.
Please also understand that for legal reasons we cannot publicly comment on details of specific review procedures, internal measures, or individual seller accounts.
If you report specific listings, that information is included in the respective review. Multiple reports about an account do not disappear into a void, but are taken into account in the overall picture.
What matters to me is:
Your commitment to a safe and fair marketplace is absolutely legitimate. 💙 Criticism can and should be voiced – as long as it remains factual. That is exactly what the community is for.
lore99l
OP7 months agoHello @steffi@ebay,
Thank you very much for the factual response. It is good to hear that my criticism is being seen as an important signal. Nevertheless, I have to return to one decisive point that is not legally complex: shipping manipulation.
While you speak of the complexity of the European principle of exhaustion, eBay customer service already confirmed to me in writing in a private correspondence regarding a case I reported that there is a clear manipulation of the shipping route there in order to abuse the seller protection policies and the internal filters.
If customer service has already clearly confirmed this abuse internally, the question arises: Why do such accounts remain active?
This is no longer about the legal gray area of used software, but about a systematic violation of eBay operating rules. The fact that no visible consequences follow despite the confirmed abuse unfortunately reinforces my suspicion that different standards are applied to extremely high sales volumes than to small sellers.
A fair marketplace does not need complex review procedures to sanction violations in which false shipping methods are systematically stated. Here, only the consistent enforcement of its own terms and conditions matters.
steffi@ebay
Hello @lore99l, thanks for your renewed, very clear feedback. 🙏
I absolutely understand why this point for you falls not under “complex legal situation,” but under “clear violation of the rules” — especially if you were already told in an individual correspondence that there is manipulation of the shipping route.
However, an important distinction needs to be made here:
A single service statement — even if it identifies a violation — does not automatically mean that no action was taken or that nothing happened. Measures against accounts are often not publicly visible. 👀
These include, for example:
restrictions on individual listings
requirements for listing setup
warnings or deadlines
temporary sales restrictions
further internal reviews
Such steps happen behind the scenes and are not communicated to third parties for legal reasons. From the outside, this can look like “inaction,” even though there is certainly a response internally.
On the shipping method topic:
Incorrectly declaring shipping methods in order to bypass policies or filters is of course not permitted. 🚫 If this fact was confirmed internally, it is assessed and sanctioned in the respective case — however, according to graduated measures and taking the overall behavior of an account into account.
I understand your wish for a visible, clear consequence. Transparency does have its limits here, though, because we are not allowed to disclose details about review processes or measures against individual sellers. 🔍⚖️
What I can assure you of:
There are no special rules for high-turnover sellers. Internal compliance and risk processes are not commission-driven, but rule-based. Especially with high sales volumes, the level of review is usually higher — not lower.
Your point about consistently enforcing the platform’s own terms and conditions is absolutely legitimate. 💙 And it is exactly this kind of concrete feedback that helps to identify systematic patterns more quickly.
imperial-modellbau
·7 months agoHello @lore99l
just buy one of those €5 product keys - and once you have it, get in touch with MS Germany and ask what it’s all about.
If it’s as you suspect, Microsoft will definitely get a bit rattled and take care of the seller on their own ! 😉
If everything’s in order, you’ve scored a cheap key !
In any case, you should NOT expect any help from eBay’s algorithm - it’s as dumb as a bag of bricks !
lore99l
OP7 months agothanks for the pragmatic advice, but that’s really not what I’m getting at. I’m not trying to save 5 € or help Microsoft as a "detective".
It’s about the principle: Why is a seller obviously allowed to violate eBay’s guidelines (passing off digital delivery as a physical package, sending shady links), while small private sellers are sanctioned for every little thing?
If I first have to become Microsoft’s deputy sheriff so that eBay enforces its own rules, then something is seriously wrong with the platform. That the algorithm is "dumb as a brick" may well be true – but behind the algorithm are people who decide at what sales volumes they turn a blind eye.
I want a clean marketplace and not a bargain bin for dubious keys, where you first have to ask MS whether you’re currently doing something illegal or not.
Regards
raffke2012
·7 months agoHello
It is obvious that these are often unlicensed digital goods or, in the worst case, money laundering methods.
In this sentence you write that it is obvious.
However, obvious means that it has not been proven.
So the police would be the right point of contact here.
But you should keep in mind that these sellers buy in very large quantities and these product keys either have a limited runtime and/or do not have all functions