I have a China based seller trying to get one of our images removed. We took the image about 8 years ago, it is of a simple air tank valve used on sprayers, as a way to pressurize small air tanks.
Our image is just the product cleaned up in photoshop and nothing more, so any recommendations on a counter claim? I have never received one of these before and want to save the $300 getting my attorney to answer this question LOL.
3 Likes
May I ask if there’s any chance that you can convincingly demonstrate prior use in commerce, either publicly-available on the `Net (or mayhaps otherwise), or privately-available via work-product records?
More than likely, unless I miss my guess, that’s the first question that your legal representation would ask.
2 Likes
Great question. No, as it was part of a company we acquired over 5 years ago, and they did not have a published catalog. The raw image is long gone.
Nobody here or then, ever thought that someone would give a crap about this, nor did anyone think a person could take a picture of a product like nut or bolt and call it their own works. I could understand if they put it on a background or added text/details ect, but a plain image of a common valve seems uncopyrightable to me, but this is not my realm.
The other question is, do I take the L and the DCMA policy hit, or double down and counterclaim and get the attorney involved, just to protect the policy warning. Because…“If the claimant does not file a lawsuit with respect to the content within 10 days, we will reinstate the content.”
2 Likes
The chances of them filing a lawsuit are prob nill.
I would have your lawyer send them a C&D and counterclaim it.
4 Likes
Ya thats what I was thinking, but at the same time it is just a picture of essentially a piece of metal. Why risk it when its fixed in less than 20 minutes.
The principle of it pisses me off, and I want to learn more, but the bigger question is, what image is next, how do we go back and product acquisitions and prove IP on 1000+ SKUs and tens of thousands of images. Lots of product images we got from acquisitions.
Oh also the contact name is a outlook email and the email name does not match the claiments name, and they added this blurb which is not true…
“Infringement type: Copyrighted text on the product detail page”
There is only specs on the detail page, nothing more.
1 Like
Cause while not a metric, I’m sure Amazon tracks how often these things happen and what kind of action you take.
Also, the principal!
4 Likes
All you need to do is appeal and submit a counter-notice. Then Amazon will reinstate the image unless the other party files a lawsuit (they won’t).
It may take a month for Amazon to reinstate it though. Still the path of least resistance.
5 Likes
Interesting. My co worker just pointed out there is nothing showing on our account health page. Is that because we are not the brand owner?
2 Likes
Did the notice come directly from Amazon? You mention an outlook email address. I thought they had to come from Amazon to have merit.
2 Likes
We got an email from Amazon, and the contact info included in the complaint was from an Outlook account but the name on the email did not match the name of the complainant.
Something like this
These are the rights owner’s contact details:
– Johnny Appleseed
– [email protected]
2 Likes
Was anything actually removed?
Could just be a forged email
2 Likes
Yes, now all images have been removed but the main image.
Nope, domain is Amazon.
2 Likes
It should show up under received intellectual property complaints and give you the option to appeal via submitting a counter-notice.
If it doesn’t show up then I don’t know what to do from there.
2 Likes
The ability of any Joe Shmoe to submit a DMCA complaint, without proper vetting by Amazon via it’s automated complaint-generating mechanism, has been a particular pain point for above-board sellers for many a year.
A prime example of Amazon’s lackadaisical approach to matters like these is the 5 damn years it took for the Editorial Team to correct the title of the applicable SHC page (link, Help Heb Revision) “Procedure for submitting a counter-notice pursuant to the DMCA” from its original title, using an improper acronym, “Procedure for submitting a counter-notice pursuant to the DCMA*” - reporting of which proved to be a fruitless exercise until SEAmod took notice of the OSFE complaints about it, and waved her magic wand.
*
There’s quite a bit of difference between “DMCA” - the acronym for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act - and “DMCA,” an acronym generally used to refer to the Defense Contract Management Agency…but I believe that Amazon simply doesn’t care about such niceties as accuracy in communications, unless its forced to care, either via an external vector such as media attention and/or regulatory intervention, or (sometimes) via an internal vector such as SEAmod seems to have rendered in the above-described scenario.
4 Likes
The proper reply would be to inform Amazon that the photo complained of was copyrighted on prior date X AS WAS THE ENTIRE AMAZON LISTING.
And you give them the copyright number, and a copy of the confirmation from the copyright office with a title of the work “Text and Images of Amazon.com Listing for ASIN ABC1234578 on date mm/dd/yyy”
That shuts down the complaint, as the DMCA complaint likely does not reference any actual copyrighted work by number, and the counter notice is clear in its statement that the works in question are certainly not copies of anyone else’s work, despite the inherent similarity of any two photos of a very common type of valve.
The lesson here is to file copyright applications for each listing, and pay a few bucks to avoid this crap.
5 Likes