Mercari has banned the sale of ultrasound photos after the platform became a venue for pregnancy-related fraud [1].

This policy change highlights the struggle of global peer-to-peer marketplaces to police highly personal or fraudulent listings while maintaining open access for sellers. The incident underscores a broader vulnerability in digital commerce where lax verification allows bad actors to exploit unsuspecting buyers.

Reports from Sept. 2, 2025, indicate that users were listing ultrasound images for sale, leading to concerns that these photos were being used to deceive others [1]. The New York Post staff said, "Strangers' ultrasounds once sold for pocket change" [1]. This specific trend prompted the platform to intervene to prevent the proliferation of pregnancy fraud.

While the ultrasound incident is a high-profile example of misuse, other analysts suggest the platform is not inherently a scam [2]. Instead, it is described as a legitimate marketplace that contains several "red flags" users must navigate [2]. These risks are often exacerbated by buyer-protection policies that vary widely across different marketplace platforms [3].

Testing of the platform's ecosystem has further illustrated the financial risks involved for users. Austin Evans spent over $1,000 testing Mercari to evaluate its legitimacy and the prevalence of problematic listings [4]. His findings align with broader concerns regarding the ability of fraudsters to list virtually any item on the platform due to minimal oversight [2].

Mercari, which originated in Japan, operates globally and allows users to sell a vast array of goods [1, 2]. However, the ability to list items with little friction has created a loophole for those seeking to sell deceptive or prohibited content [2, 3]. The company continues to balance its open-listing model with the need for stricter safety protocols to protect its user base.

“"Strangers' ultrasounds once sold for pocket change."”

The ban on ultrasound photos reflects a shift toward more aggressive content moderation in the C2C (consumer-to-consumer) economy. As fraudsters move from selling physical counterfeit goods to selling digital or emotional deception, platforms must evolve their verification processes. This case suggests that simple category bans may be insufficient if the underlying buyer-protection infrastructure remains inconsistent.