It looks like the U.S. legal system is a little more understanding of eBay’s business model and its role in policing fake luxury items.

Last week I mentioned the auction giant’s troubles in France, where the courts have ruled in favor of LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, which wants eBay to stop all sales of counterfeit luggage and to halt sales of its perfumes — Christian Dior, Guerlain, Givenchy, and Kenzo — by unauthorized distributors.

Tony jeweler Tiffany & Co.  has been seeking a similar ruling since 2004, when it sued eBay over the listing of items falsely labeled as authentic Tiffany jewelry. The jeweler wants eBay to be held responsible for the listings, forcing it to take a more proactive role in keeping fakes off the site.

According to an Associated Press story, the judge in the case did not agree.

The judge said that when Tiffany notified eBay of suspected counterfeit goods, eBay “immediately removed those listings.” Although the online auction company refused to go further, by preemptively taking down suspicious listings for Tiffany jewelry, the judge said eBay didn’t have to make such a move.

Ebay was, of course, thrilled with the ruling:

EBay spokeswoman Nichola Sharpe said Monday that the ruling “confirms that that eBay acted reasonably and has adequate procedures in place to effectively address counterfeiting.”

Tiffany was not:

Mark Aaron, a spokesman for Tiffany, said the company was “shocked and deeply dismayed” by the decision. Tiffany lawyer James Swire said his company might appeal it. Swire said eBay should be responsible for counterfeits on its sites, or else sellers of fakes could “go on victimizing consumers.”

So what do you think? How much responsibility should eBay have for items listed on the site?