EBay countered that LVMH is trying to crack down on Internet auctions merely because it is uncomfortable with the business model, which tends to cut out the middleman.

"If counterfeits appear on our site, we take them down swiftly," eBay spokeswoman Sravanthi Agrawal said. "But today's ruling is not about counterfeits. Today's ruling is about an attempt by LVMH to protect uncompetitive commercial practices at the expense of consumer choice and the livelihood of law-abiding sellers that eBay empowers every day." She said eBay hopes to appeal the ruling.

The case pit two pillars of their industries -- one old, one new -- in a country whose courts often challenge Internet companies on matters protected elsewhere by freedom of speech. For example, French courts have ordered U.S. auction sites to keep Nazi paraphernalia away from French eyes.

The ruling came down against eBay on two fronts. The court faulted the online company for "guilty negligence," for not doing enough to prevent fake goods from being sold on its site. The court also ruled that eBay was responsible for the "illicit sale" of perfumes from the LVMH empire, which can be sold only through the brands' "selective distribution networks."

High-end fashion companies like LVMH make their money by selling exclusive products, and fight a never-ending battle against cheap ripoffs and alleged affronts to their trademarks.

In an earlier instance of LVMH trying to protect its brands online, a Paris court in 2005 ordered Google Inc. to pay 200,000 euros (about $260,000 at the time) to Louis Vuitton for breach of trademark. In that case, Google had to stop displaying advertisements for Louis Vuitton's rivals when Web users typed Vuitton's name into the search engine.