After four years, a federal judge has finally ruled in the counterfeit goods case in which Tiffany & Co. (NYSE: TIF) sued eBay Inc. (NASDAQ: EBAY), demanding it create better polices on its auction site and assume responsibility for the goods traded there.

But the judge ruled in favor of eBay, saying that "the law is clear: it is the trademark owner's burden to police its mark. [...] Tiffany must ultimately bear the burden of protecting its trademark."

No doubt, this is a significant victory for eBay and all online retailers that, while agreeing to take fake merchandise off their sites, want to be alerted to it by the owners of the trademarks. This means e-tailers don't need to police their sites for counterfeit goods, something that would have been quite costly.

If this sounds a little odd to you, maybe that's because of a recent suit regarding copyrighted material on Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG)'s YouTube. Viacom Inc. (NYSE: VIA) has sued the owner of the video sharing site for $1 billion in damages, accusing YouTube of enabling copyright infringement since users upload copyrighted material to the site.

Over the years, eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) has overcome numerous adversaries, from customer fears about online purchasing to the very real threat of physical retailers. It has defeated or absorbed dozens of competitors, constantly morphing to offer fresh services to its users while continuing to draw a hefty profit. However, as Gary Sattler recently noted, eBay's unbelievable success may have begun to sow the seeds of its downfall. Once a counter-cultural answer to the monopoly (and monotony) of physical retailers, the online giant has become the dominant culture. Moreover, it's monopoly of online marketing and apparent lack of concern for its users have resulted in massively increased prices and fees, driving many of its sellers right out of the market.

As if eBay's self-destructive tendencies weren't enough of a problem, France's courts have joined in on the march to disaster. In an attempt to protect the integrity of French luxury brands, a French court ruled that eBay must pay approximately $63 million to French companies whose products have been victimized by online sales. The plaintiff, LVMH, which represents several French luxury brands, argued that its businesses have been undermined by eBay. Ebay's first crime was permitting counterfeit copies of Vuitton and Dior bags to appear on the site. As if this wasn't enough, the company was cited for permitting actual bottles of Dior, Kenzo, Givenchy and Guerlain perfume to be sold, as these are only supposed to be sold in specialty stores. On the surface, this seems like a minor hiccup, but the promulgation of high-quality knockoffs and the availability of partially-used luxury brand items are central to a large portion of eBay's business. It seems like the loss of these two lucrative revenue streams could cost the company a great deal.

Between increased shipping rates, French courts, and its own excesses, it doesn't seem like a good time to be eBay!

This post is one of several on business heirs apparent. Let us know in the comments whether you think Delphine Arnault should take up the reigns of LVMH, and be sure to check out the other heir apparent posts.

Delphine Arnault is a London School of Economics grad as well as being the daughter of Bernard Arnault, chairman of LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, the world's largest luxury conglomerate -- a company with an astonishing 30 billion Euros (about $47 billion) in assets. She was just 28 when in 2003 her father had her installed on the board of LVMH, where she was the youngest board member and the only woman. Having joined the company in 2000, she came to head Dior's shoe and bag division. Colleagues say she can seem shy, but that she's a careful observer and she appears to have inherited her father's determination. That may be why she's been called the "wolf in the cashmere coat."

She can often be found by her father's side, or even in his place, at fashion shows such as last September's Paris Fashion Week, where she and her husband Alessandro Gancia were "swarmed by paparazzi as though they were film stars." Even though she flew under the radar for a few years, she is reportedly becoming increasingly a public face of the company.

This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and watch out for more Battle of the Brands posts.

Recently, someone told me that only 1% of all Louis Vuitton handbags in the world are authentic, which is quite surprising considering how many people, young and old, tote the luxury status symbols. I guess what most of them don't realize is that some of these bags are the real McCoy, while it seems a lot more are just reproductions. Several weeks ago, I posted Coach bags: You're just not worthy because Coach Inc. (NYSE: COH) was stepping up their luxury handbag game with a new, more exclusive line of bags priced from $10,000 to $500 and adding hoity-toity boutiques to bring in a more elite clientele.

While both Coach and Louis Vuitton (LVMH) (EPA: MC) already have classic and luxury goods status among many, it seems that both companies are grasping for the top rung of the handbag ladder. LVMH may seem to be ahead of the game, since A-list celebrities such as Uma Thurman, Naomi Campbell, Scarlett Johansson, and even rapper Snoop Dog often travel in style and are photographed with LV bags. In comparison, I can't even think of an instance where I've spotted a celebrity with a Coach bag. After a quick Google search, I did however find a picture of Jessica Alba holding a cute Coach Daphne Straw Top Handle Bag ($168), which surprised me because most women I see with Coach bags tend to be older and middle class. In fact, a budding fashionista once told me that Coach bags were "mom" bags. So then it's understandable that Coach would spring this new Legacy line on us in a not-so-veiled attempt to lose its "mom" status.

The current Barron's features an article titled "Rich America, Poor America." It argues that we now live in an age of "plutonomy." Plutonomy is defined as "a global economy disproportionately propelled by the rich." This is the new economic, social and political reality that must be recognized in any investment strategy.

Many discussions about growing inequality in income and wealth in the US and in the world (and I think this inequality is real and undeniable, despite the Wall Street Journal's ongoing effort to argue otherwise) focus on the political and social aspects of this trend. This makes sense, since it is very much a political and social issue. But Barron's asks an interesting economic question -- what should you do as an investor, given this trend?

The simple answer is to invest in the company's that profit from serving the ultra-rich. Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C) has put together a basket of stocks that tap into the luxury goods market. These include Coach (NYSE: COH), Polo Ralph Lauren (NYSE: RL), Tiffany (NYSE: TIF), LVMH (MC.France) and Porsche (POR3.Germany). These stocks have outperformed the market over the last few years. Ajay Kapur, a Citigroup analyst who focuses on these companies, thinks they will continue to outperform, since the growth of economic inequality is not likely to change anytime soon.

Of course, it may strike some people as strange if not immoral to worry about investing in the midst of such a troubling social development. The Barron's article provides some solid data on why we should be concerned about this. In particular, it provides recent data on the Gini Coefficient, a standard measure of inequality used by sociologists and economists who study the topic. The data clearly shows that the US is becoming more unequal. Equally disturbing is that fact that as far as economic inequality is concerned, the US is becoming less like other wealthy, democratic, industrial nations (Germany, Spain, Denmark, France, Sweden) and more like less developed, less democratic countries (Mexico, Hong Kong, Brazil, China). So you should make adjustments to your investment strategy, but if you find this growing gap between the rich and everyone else disturbing, you may want to consider working for political change too.