It's been a big month for eBay. Not only did they recently wrap up a big deal with Buy.com as we mentioned earlier, but a New York court ruled in their favor today in a case brought against them by jeweler Tiffany & Co. Tiffany claimed that eBay should be held responsible for fake jewelry sold by independent sellers on their site. Not quite, said the U.S. court.

If this story sounds familiar, it's because it is. Several weeks ago a French court issued the opposite ruling, holding eBay liable for the knock-off Louis Vuitton and Christian Dior goods auctioned on the site—to the tune of $63 million.

While we already had a debate regarding how eBay should police its site several weeks ago—the larger question remains, which is whether eBay should be held responsible at all. Think about it. Sites like Craigslist, which are an intermediary much like eBay, so far haven't been held responsible for the illegal goods sold over their site. And on Craigslist, let's face it, scalped tickets to the Bret Michaels concert aren't even the worst of it. Of course, the difference may lie in the fact that eBay gets a piece of the pie every time a fake is sold on its site, whereas Craigslist only makes money off the job and apartment listings (although there's scams and illegality aplenty there too).

Who got it right—the French court or the U.S. court?