Suspected Intellectual Property Violations --- Mother-of-pearl???

Got the dreaded Suspected Intellectual Property Violations this morning, and it listed one item with the reason
Trademark misuse(MADDesign Mother of Pearl)

Did some a-hole just trademark mother-of-pearl? How can they do that? It’s a commonly-used term.

I have 52 listings with mother-of-pearl (spelled with the dashes). I hope I’m not looking at 52 upcoming violations.


I’m sorry to hear that. I wanted to make something for people who do the Ironman, only to learn that the mileage number is trademarked. I mean, it’s a number.


This exists, but the mark is for MADDesign Mother of Pearl, not Mother of Pearl by itself.

Assuming you didn’t use the “MADDesign” portion of this, I would demand that they retract the complaint and sue them for damages if they don’t.

They could’ve registered this just to file abusive complaints on Amazon. It’s a common tactic.


Suspected, typically means it was a bot action. SOoo more bots making life hard is what it sounds like to me.


Ah, right, that’s a pain then. The RO most likely has nothing to do with it then.


Thanks for the info and screen shot. Their website directs sales to Amazon. I’d send the following to both locations. Do I need to add or edit it?

Re the Suspected Intellectual Property Violation on Amazon — your mark is “MADDesign Mother of Pearl”, not Mother of Pearl by itself.

My product does not have “MADDesign Mother of Pearl” anywhere. You cannot file a Suspected Intellectual Property Violation for “Mother of Pearl” alone.

Your complaint is abusive and a form of harassment. Please retract your complaint immediately or I will report you to Amazon and sue for damages.

Meredith Laskow


Should I just start by sending the screen shot to Amazon instead?

yeah, definitely. Time for breakfast and morning-ish coffee.


I believe this case the rights holder didn’t actually file the claim. This IMHO seems like an Amazon bot doing this.

The good news is that I have had many many many suspected violations. I would not worry too much about this one.

However, unfortunately, this will probably be a headache to resolve with Amazon.


I would not venture to send this, simply for the reason that our friend @Default_Username astutely points out upthread.

Were this an actual complaint from that RO, rather than a SIPV, you should have received an actual email detailing the Complaint Number, and the guidelines for the Retraction Process.

I’m fairly certain that this is yet another instance of Amabots Gone Wild; were I going to contact the RO directly in such a situation, it would be via a carefully-couched letter, dispatched via Certified Mail, asking whether or not they had initiated such a complaint for your Offer-Listings.


What documentation is Amazon asking you for the appeal?

1 Like

I’ll start with the last sentence of the email:

We leveraged a combination of automated means to identify this issue and make this decision.
— which sounds like a bot to me.

Most of the requested Amabot documentation assumes my guilt.

How to address the listing violation?

To address your listing violation, click ‘Edit’ next to each affected ASIN in the Suspected Intellectual Property Violations section…

Your listing violation will be removed automatically within 8 hours if you submit to Amazon for review after editing it in one of the following ways:

1. Remove the trademarked term from the product detail page entirely, OR

2. Change the brand name to accurately reflect the product and match trademarked terms used on the product detail page OR

3. Update the detail page to add compatibility terms before the trademarked term, if the product is using the trademarked term to refer to another product, such as “charger for Kindle E-Reader”, “charger compatible with Kindle E-Reader”, and “charger made for Kindle E-Reader”.

… all of which assumes guilt and is irrelevant to my situation.

If you believe there has been an error, please submit an explanation through your Account Health page [Amazon Sign-In] and follow the instructions provided. Your explanation should include the following information:

1. A letter of authorization or licensing agreement proving that you are authorized by the rights owner to create and list products using trademarked term in relation to your product. The documentation submitted must meet the following criteria:

- The document includes name and address of rights owner.

- The document explicitly authorizes you to make and list products using the rights owner’s trademark, under your own brand name.

2. An explanation and any evidence or documentation demonstrating how the listings do not violate our intellectual property policies.

Only #2. applies to me. I’ll send your screen shot and explanation.


Please keep us updated, my friend.

If that doesn’t suffice, I might have an inkling on how to proceed.


@meredithbead you might send a friendly note to MADDesign Mother of Pearl, letting them know that an Amazon bot is mistakenly targeting “mother of pearl” in their name, and could they please reach out to Amazon to help expedite the correction process.

Their Amazon communication could say:

It has come to our attention that Amazon is mistakenly sending suspected intellectual property violation notices to Sellers for the use of “mother of pearl” and citing our trademark as cause.

Although the phrase “mother of pearl” is part of our trademark, it is also a standalone phrase that is not trademarked, by us or anyone else, because it is the widely known common name of the mineral compound nacre, an organic gemstone naturally formed inside mollusks.

Please make immediate adjustments to differentiate between our trademark, MADDesign Mother of Pearl, and the common phrase “mother of pearl”.

Please remove any violations issued to other Sellers as a result of your error as soon as possible.

Thank you for your attention and speedy correction–
MADDesign Mother of Pearl


wouldn’t it be your trademark?

1 Like

Actually, Papy’s letter is a recommendation on what Meredith should request that the RO send to Amazon, provided that it is willing to do this:


SIPVs used to be easy to get reversed.

Then many of those were reversed were again flagged by the bot.

Then they stopped reversing them.

This was a major portion of why I stopped selling on Amazon.

I continue to get SIPV on some of the 4K or so listings I have had on vacation since 2020.

This is an example of the “carborundum effect” in action.


Yep … skipped right over that one little word …


I just spoke to Seller Support, to someone who really didn’t understand the problem although she tried. She said my case will be transferred/elevated to internal affairs (?) At least I think that’s what she said. I requested an email transcript of our conversation, still not here after 15 minutes. My case log says “Pending Amazon Action”.


It will not be particularly surprising to find that the transfer to the dreaded “internal team” proves unfruitful, at least in any semblance of a timely manner, but you’ve undertaken the needed first step in securing that Case ID.

While you’re waiting, may I ask if you use the Professional Selling Plan, as opposed to the Individual, and if so, if you are familiar with Category Listing Reports?

Yes it will, I just mentioned in another thread today, why does Amazon keep dropping alligators in our lap, studio, office, shop, warehouse every day.

You get to work thinking you are going to do one thing, then you end up wrestling the alligators.

And to this point, why do they do it every morning!!!


All of Handmade is on this plan but the $40/month fee is waived unless we sell 30 or more items (per month? I forget) on the commercial side.

I looked this up in Seller Central, and it said approval needed before listing certain products, which doesn’t apply to Handmade.

At least this gave me a laugh. For me, morning brain fog is compounded by today’s chronic migraine dysfunction. Opening a well-written case and speaking coherently on the phone — well, I’ve already surpassed my expectations for today. I’ll write MADDesigns with Papy’s suggestions later.