This is part of the new user Agreement, effective June 8th for current sellers:

Obligations with respect to allegedly non-authentic items:

For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, buyers are required to destroy an item if they claim it is not authentic. Once a buyer confirms destruction of the item, eBay will reimburse the buyer.

For covered claims that meet the conditions and are not excluded, sellers agree to not hold buyers or eBay responsible for the destruction of an item if it is not believed to be authentic.

On its face, it is stating that if the buyer files a claim because the buyer believes an item is not authentic, the buyer must destroy the item and once the buyer confirms that the item has been destroyed, eBay will then reimburse the buyer (although not stated here, other parts of the agreement make it clear that the money will later come out of the seller's hide) and the seller has no recourse. The working is confusing and vague. The policy seems to apply to all items on eBay, not just designer products. So, if a seller sells a doll, for example, a #3 Barbie, can the buyer simply claim that he or she "believes" that the doll is not an authentic #3, tell eBay she or she sent the doll through the backyard woodchipper, and have eBay refund the purchase amount to the buyer? There is no apparent requirement that the buyer provide any evidence, such as a third party appraisal, that the item is not "authentic" or provide any proof to eBay that the item was destroyed. The seller is apparently completely cut out of the transaction and has no way to defend the sale. So what is to keep a dishonest buyer from receiving a perfectly authentic #3, telling eBay he or she believed the doll was not authentic and destroyed it (even though the same doll is now proudly displayed on the buyer's shelf) and getting his or her money back from eBay, so that the buyer gets both the doll and the money? Or emailing the seller and demanding a hefty discount, or else the buyer will file a claim that the item is not authentic.

Authentic is not even defined! Does this apply only to fakes and reproductions? Or does "authentic" come into issue any time there is a dispute between the seller and buyer regarding the doll? If a seller sells a china doll as a "covered-wagon hairstyle" and the buyer claims it was instead a "flat top," does that mean the doll is not authentic? If a seller lists as doll as from the 1880's and the buyer claims the doll is from the 1900's, is the doll not authentic? If an umarked bisque shoulderhead doll is sold as a Simon and Halbig and the seller claims it is in fact a Kestner, does that make the doll not authentic? And why does the buyer, who is certainly not an disinterested party, become the sole arbitrator of what is authentic?

And eBay wonders why I went from power seller to not listing at all!