Or it’s better to write, ‘Gildan Products with our own branding and design’
Your questions worry me to no end. You do not seem to understand the LoA that was given to you and what it says you can do.
Read it again because none of that is allowed.
ETA - And yes, I’ve had clients with this same issue (Using the shirt brand in the title or as the brand)
ETA 2 - What is your definition of “Branding on them”
The wording is a bit off, and for something like this that matters.
@Ali, Gildan has only granted you the right to mention that you used their blank but branded product as a base in creating your own transformational product, and to resell your transformation of their product.
You are not authorized to resell non-transformed (blank) Gildan products or merch at all, except as the blank upon which you have printed your own Intellectual Property, after your purchase of the Gildan product.
It is illegal to rebrand someone else’s IP without their permission, and your LOA does not authorize you to resell Gildan blank shirts under your brand.
Your brand should not be entering the conversation because technically what you offer is a service, not a product.
Your IP that you print onto the Gildan shirts can be separately copyrighted by your trademarked business, but that does not change the brand of the shirt.
Can revise your section D and post it here again?
Thank you @papy, @oneida_books I have fixed this mistake. I mistakenly wrote ‘Gildan Blanks with our own branding’ thinking it mean’t the same thing.
ETA - had never used Gildan anywhere in my listing.
ETA - 2 My definition of Branding on them was that we were using our own brand’s name on the products, on the back label, and we had our designs printed on the Blanks. I have used the exact wording in the letter and have modified it so that I don’t mess anything up with this appeal.
Proof of Non-Infringement:
Letter of Authorization from Gildan permitting us to sell Gildan products (bearing the Gildan Trademarks on its labels only) as decorated products with our branding and design.
Appeal Details:
a. Root Causes: We inadvertently sold Gildan products (bearing Gildan on its Labels) with our branding and design printed on the products without explicit permission from Gildan.
b. Actions Taken: We have obtained a Letter of Authorisation from Gildan.
c. Policy Compliance: Our ongoing commitment to complying with Amazon's Intellectual Property Policy is evident through continuous monitoring, and establishment of a direct line of communication with all the brands we are working with, including Gildan. We are proactively engaging with the said Brands to obtain the necessary permissions before we start selling anything on Amazon.
d. Evidence of Compliance: We have obtained the Letter of Authorisation from Gildan for revised product listings, permitting us to sell Gildan products (bearing the Gildan Trademarks on its labels only), including Gildan®, as decorated products with our branding and design on Amazon.
Supporting Details:
We believe the initial flagging of our account was a result of automated processes and misunderstanding rather than deliberate infringement. Our efforts to rectify the situation demonstrate our commitment to compliance and rectification.
We have reviewed all Amazon policies around what products may be listed and sold on Amazon, and we have ensured that all our employees are aware of all policies regarding the listing of items.
We have reviewed all of our listings to ensure that they follow all rules and policies around intellectual property restrictions and instituted policies to ensure that all future items listed are authorized and permitted.
This is not quite accurate. You can legally do this.
Since you left out (unless maybe it’s back through the thread and I’m not going back through it all) the titles/images you used, I can’t say exactly the issue. However, I’m 99% certain it would have been the usage of “Gildan” in your title that was the violation … although it could also have been the image displaying the tag.
I would say the “Brand” field on Amazon would need to be your own, not “Gildan.” For one, you’re not the brand registry owner of Gildan so you likely cannot create listings with that brand. And it would be highly deceptive if the brand said Gildan as that would imply that this is a Gildan designed and decorated product, which it is not.
I don’t know what the legal interpretation of the LOA would be, but the intention is surely for you to be able to sell the products under your own brand, and the only mention of Gildan (if mentioned) is the fact that you used a Gildan blank, which is a relevant part of the product listing as they are a commonly used blank and consumers may know the sizing of that brand.
So maybe I’m not 99% certain any more.
I just assumed you weren’t putting “Gildan” into the brand field. If you did though that’s a violation since you are modifying the product. So just like the title you couldn’t put “Gildan” in there.
Gildan shouldn’t be in the brand or title. It would be a bullet point
- Printed on a Gildan Blank (and maybe model number)
Bots likely will find issue again in the future, but the LoA allows use in the title.
You could have … {text or image that is printed} “printed on a Gildan shirt.”
Example title: “I 
U printed on a Gildan shirt” and be within your trademark usage rights with this LoA. the brand though has to be the seller in this case.
The LOA actually seems very broad with how the mark is allowed to be used, as long as the item is decorated.
@GGX , @oneida_books Thank you so much for your insights.
I did not mention Gildan anywhere in these listings. We were selling the products under our own branding. The images were imported from Printful, who most likely took them from Gildan, and we believe that put us on Amazon’s radar.
I have made the suggested changes;
Proof of Non-Infringement:
Letter of Authorization from Gildan permitting us to sell Gildan products (bearing the Gildan Trademarks on its labels only) as decorated products with our branding and design.
Appeal Details:
a. Root Causes: We inadvertently listed Gildan product mockups with our decorated designs on them during our initial product uploads from our Gildan-Affiliated supplier, Printful.
Because of this, our listings were flagged for having a trademarked logo in their images as we did not have permission to use these images from Gildan in writing.
b. Actions Taken: We deleted affected listings from our account and contacted Gildan, to provide us with a Letter of Authorisation. And since, have obtained a Letter of Authorisation from Gildan to rectify the situation.
c. Policy Compliance: Our ongoing commitment to complying with Amazon's Intellectual Property Policy is evident through continuous monitoring, and establishment of a direct line of communication with all the brands we are working with, including Gildan. We are proactively engaging with the said Brands to obtain the necessary permissions before we start selling anything.
d. Evidence of Compliance: We have obtained the Letter of Authorisation from Gildan for revised product listings, permitting us to sell Gildan products (bearing the Gildan Trademarks on its labels only), including Gildan®, as decorated products with our branding and design on Amazon and have submitted that letter here in this appeal.
Imported from Printful = Printful Supplied the wearable product, imprinted with your artwork? Yes?
The authorization letter indicates "In exchange for the authorization granted herein, Company (you) herby agrees to only sell authentic Gildan products under the Gildan Trademarks which have been purchased from Gildan…
They are trying to be sure the chain of custody on their brand is maintained.
We have machines that do this type of imprinting and have made similar products in the past. We no longer do as we found higher margins in other types of products. We had an account with Gildan, still do but do not use it. Net terms, we bought the blanks directly from them and decorated them ourselves.
Now while I am relatively sure that Printful has a similar relationship, you do not. Something to think about as you work through this.
@oneida_books is the one to follow on this, they have helped many others, including me for well over 10 years.
Of note @GGX 's good contributions.
One other thing I think of is the image may have show the Gilden Brand on the tag of the shirt. We have seen this type of thing on Amazon. We will often do a blur to the image to avoid the problem.
Yes, you are correct.
We do not have an account with Gildan. But we were able to contact someone on their team, who gave us the Letter of Authorisation. Wouldn’t the Letter of Authorisation work in this case? Even if we don’t have an account with Gildan, we are buying Gildan from Printful, a Gildan-Affiliated supplier.
We do have invoices from Printful, stating that we bought the Gildan products from them. And the letter of Authorisation for Printful, as their authorised supplier from Gildan.
I am extremely grateful to @oneida_books, @GGX, and everyone else(I am not able to tag more than 2 alas) for their incredible insights in helping me understand all this.
Honestly, I am very new to Amazon. I have worked with licensed merchandise before so I believed we just needed the supplier’s permission, as Printful has a local Amazon extension. All of this has been a learning experience for me, and I still don’t understand a lot. English is not my first language but I still want to make this work.
I just do not have an answer to that. Since we are a direct customer of Gildan. I would say let’s wait until someone comes along that matches the exact situation you are in. Yet it is a small slice in the eCommerce pie.
ETA:
Good for you, I only have the ability to speak one language, English… and sometimes I struggle with that. I took 4 years of German in High School. Sadly it was the same year four times in a row. I never did pass.
For that reason I deeply respect those that are multilingual, to me you are doing a great job!
I might try to see if Gildan:
- Knows and regards Printful as sourcing from them
- If so will slightly edit the Loa to include them as a source
Every LoA I’ve written to help someone always includes where they source from and restricts it to valid suppliers.
Late to the thread but this could be an issue.
Good Vibes is a chain of retailers who sell screened Ts, sweatshirts and other products. I am aware of their selling in Northern New England and have no idea where else they may exist. The also operate under the name Life Is Good.
Their trademark is registered as is their slogan Life is Good.
Seems to me this phrase could be deemed to be an attempt to create confusion with their trademark, since it has no real relevance to describing the product. Might be a legitimate IP violation that needs to be addressed.
@Ali @oneida_books
Im late to this thread but read all of it. Honestly it was like an intense tv series but ended before you knew what happened!
Please do yoi have an update on this? How did your appeal go?
Also going forward, I use printful as well and if it wasnt for this I wouls have lost my account so thank you. I was wondering would it be worth while adding the printful letter of appeal before uploading the products? Eg, upload brand name gilden, and it should come up eith catalog authorization right? Send in the forms and see if it gets accepted. You would think then even after uploading your own brand, if the bots scan and match anything that is related to gilden then this should be ok?
Not gonna lie… i dont really want to try it with my account. Was hoping someone else reading might have already done it lol