Not technically an Amazon ‘announcement’ but an important statement in the Forum (NSFE) (My prejudiced opinion of course)–
Amazon is FINALLY letting people know (despite this being BURIED in the text) that RECEIPTS are no longer proof of anything for selling on Amazon.
Of course, they only state this about items when an LOA is required, so much of Amaozn is still the wild wild west of garbage items bought on clearance…
“3. Nothing you buy from online or physical (brick-and-mortar) retailers can be resold. That would be considered a “counterfeit” product under the new rules and you may risk having your account permanently deactivated.”
The rest –
Letter of Authorization
In this article, we will cover what a Letter of Authorization is and how it helps you sell with Amazon.
A Letter of Authorization (LOA) is a license agreement between an owner of a trademark/design patent/copyright and a third-party seller to authorize that the third party (licensee) can use the Intellectual Property (IP), in exchange for consideration. Such an agreement outlines the ways in which the licensee may use the property owned by the licensor.
Licensing is beneficial for IP owners, as it allows them to generate revenue out of their property by making it available to others. The benefit to the seller is that the license agreement allows you to list your products using the intellectual property rights of other entities with their permission, subject to the terms of the agreement.
Considerations for sellers who need to provide a Letter of Authorization in order to sell with Amazon:
The Letter of Authorization is usually only granted to businesses/sellers large enough to buy in bulk from the brand.
If you purchase directly from the brand, consider contacting them to find out what their minimum purchase order is to get registered as a distributor. Be sure to get a Letter of Authorization from the brand for use with Amazon at that point, and ensure the letter is up to date.
The five key terms which must be present in every IP licensing agreement (LOA) submitted to Amazon are:
‘Licensor’–The company/brand providing the rights to intellectual property
‘Licensee’–The company/brand receiving the rights to use the intellectual property.
'Grant’–The intellectual property being licensed and the scope of rights granted
'Geographic Scope’–The specific territory or territories where use is authorized (may be worldwide)
'Term’–The duration of the authorization (may be perpetual)
Nothing you buy from online or physical (brick-and-mortar) retailers can be resold. That would be considered a “counterfeit” product under the new rules and you may risk having your account permanently deactivated.
I strongly suspect that railing, ranting, and raving is about to commence ramping up in reply…
ETA:
P.S. I also strongly suspect that your π-Day efforts with Michelle might well have played a role in Glenn’s - who may or may not be the “Original Glenn” member of the FMT-CMT - creation of this discussion.
Unfortunately, I see that Glenn has now edited the original text of his initial post, removing the reference to retailer purchases of the above-quoted 3rd bullet point:
Not even a little surprised. I saw that removal coming. It just doesn’t hold true in all situations.
The “physical (brick-and-mortar) retailers” part is true in relation to “counterfeit.” No receipt will cover that claim. However I have seen receipts get FBA inventory back.
The “Nothing you buy from online” in relation to “counterfeit” though is not always the case.
One of these days when I need a vacation from the Forum (but refuse to shut up on there) I am going to use that pacifier in a response and see how long of a time out the MODS give me…
Wow. Since @Dogtamer posted the link I was curious of course. And you know what - today, 3 days later, point 3 has disappeared! (Certainly you know already) Amazing, isn’t it? I think someone was very angry with Glenn. And again nobody knows how receipts will be handled.
But CM’s don’t post anything without authorization, so who told Glenn to post it or what was the ref material? Unless that was from internal use only material.
That article, statement, whatever shouldn’t have been under the title “Letter of Authorization”. A receipt would not be a verifiable claim to brand authorization.
The MODS have been playing word games and hinting for well over a year (possibly two) now that receipts no longer count.
I know people don’t give them a lot of credit (deservedly so some of the time) but having wasted (sadly) thousands of hours on the various versions of the Forum and I have openly speculated that in some areas they have been leading the field and trying to drag Amazon (kicking and screaming) into a more stated policy.
I’m delusionally hopeful that the post from @glenn was just a premature notice and they actually will put it into their written policies.
In the meantime, it’s business as usual where sellers skating on thin ice need to pay even MORE attention to what Amazon does, rather than what their policies state.
Until I see a virtual FLOOD of successful Section 3 appeals for using receipts instead of invoices I doubt that anything changed to make them actually valid.
And now, in the last hour or so, the FMT-CMT has begun ‘sanitizing’ the NSFE discussion in question, by removing select posts.
Because I’ve got a copy of every single post that’s been made there - me likey me SOME automated mechanisms - I’m cautiously optimistic that this is the most-likely scenario we’ll see play out:
