Sorry to be so late in reading and replying, but I think anyone can change the “return address” amazon sends returned items to. So, that warehouse can be the address, at least until the goods in question are removed.
But I’d think that Amazon would have paperwork that came with the shipment to at least identify the waybill number for an LTL, or a tracking number for a loose cartons shipment, and THAT would allow the seller to find the actual source of these goods, and thereby, who they were intended for.
Amazon’s internal definition of what constitutes “Counterfeit” casts a wide dragnet, as a judicious reading between the lines of the OP’s initial 17Jun`24 NSFE discussion’s post starkly illustrates:
To be fair, I’m constrained to admit that I DO strongly suspect that said OP most likely shot themselves in the foot via a failure to perform Due Diligence right from the get-go* - but I’m further motivated to think that Amazon’s headlong (and often heedless of obstacles) pursuit of the GEI (“Global Expansion Initiative”) will - eventually, inevitably, & ineluctably - prove to have been a poor course upon which to tack.
*
When ya lie down with the unkempt dogs, can you really be surprised if you find fleas feeding upon your hide?
It will be interesting to see whether or not the Editorial Team takes note of the admonition & corrects the error…
*
n.b. that the Editorial Team has been playing even more fast and loose with the re-purposing of News Headline URLs over the last year or two than was previously the historical case; the currently supported “id version” URL linked in the first ¶, https: //sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/headlines.html?id=GZV6PXTERGYHNH93, may well change to the “ref version” in the future - if so, the URL will likely shift to https: //sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/headlines.html?ref=GZV6PXTERGYHNH93 (which is currently pointing to the 3July2024 News Headline “Webinar: Learn best practices for Amazon resellers”).
For many, many years, the general principle followed was that the ‘Headline ID’ - which, in the case of both of the aforementioned offerings from 1 & 3July`24, is “GZV6PXTERGYHNH93” - would uniquely be assigned to a singular News Headline.
I’ve yet to wrap my head fully around exactly what is Amazon’s motivation in changing the historical paradigm as it has…
It’s also been some time since I saw someone post about receiving a ‘dev’ URL from Seller Support, but that problem still would not appear to corrected:
I do not know why Amazon would think that its own iteration of the Quip collaborative software suite - designed to facilitate team collaboration within the bounds of the INTERNAL structure of the organization using it - would be appropriate in this situation.
The News Headline itself was edited just before close of business EDT yesterday, 072624, so I’d consider it within the realm of possibility that the embedded URL in Bryce’s original post was edited in concurrence, but it still strikes me as strange…
Which is why I declined to create an Amazon Quip account by submitting an SoA Account-registered email address - not because I suspect bad-actor phishing, but because I simply do not yet believe that this situation is likely to be what Amazon intended.
I can envision a scenario or two where Amazon might believe it advisable to do this, but I ain’t gonna be a guinea pig if I can prevent it.
'Twould not surprise me to learn that Bryce’s amended post has already received a few “It is off topic or inappropriate” flags*, judging from this reply from one of the seasoned and savvy forum veterans who still tread that minefield:
Or perhaps one of the alternate choices, which are limited to 5; one of my biggest pet peeves with the Screeching Harpy’s Abomination NSFE is the deprecation of the “Other” flag & its concomitant ability to flesh out the flag in short, succinct detail
I don’t disagree, but when I mentioned upthread that I can envision a scenario or two where Amazon’s TPTB (or one of their well-siloed team’s TPTB) might consider this an advisable course upon which to tack while Sailing The River, I had primarily in mind the recent phenomenon of the Amazon Developer Support Team being folded into Case Lobby responses, as was the case with our friend @Tried_Tested’s still-ongoing travails through NO fault of his own ().
Lemon’s reply re: that the escalation had been handed off to the Dev Team, far-upthread from the reply I just linked here from earlier this week, caught me by surprise, as I’d not anticipated it (Full Disclosure: we ourselves maintain more than one Developer Account enrolled in SP-API).
Still, over the last six months or so I’ve seen a variety of email responses, posted in various discussion venues here, there, and almost everywhere, which quote language from the Dev Team - we ourselves recently got one from that team to an SoA Account, on a matter of IP Infringement, directly from Brand Registry Support - so I’m not yet convinced that Amazon’s intent isn’t focused (as it almostalwaysIS, in many a circumstance) on reducing support infrastructure costs to the bottom line.
Strictly FBM. Some part of it explained that sellers can’t control FBA, so there is no penalty while pretty much admitting that Amazon would not be able to meet the new requirements.
Seriously, though, I do wonder how many poor souls went down the rabbit-hole of trying to create a Quip account after navigating to Bryce’s internal-only link…
).
