Amazon trademark issue

I have done another video on this.

It is not the really tedious one hour 45 minute video, or even the heavily edited 28 minute video.

It is the 9 minute summary - enjoy.

This is extracted subtitles, not perfect, but a good start...

Hi. Well, firstly, for those that have 
 been following, my cold has nearly 
 cleared up, but I do apologize that I 
 will almost certainly end up coughing at 
 some point during this. 
 Also, I'm letting you know I'm sparing 
 you from a really tedious video. 
 I had a chat, online chat with Amazon 
 yesterday and I recorded it. I recorded 
 the chat window. I recorded me and audio 
 and so on and put it all together and 
 edited an hour and 45 minutes of online 
 chat down to 28 minutes. That took me a 
 while 
 and then I decided no, that was actually 
 too tedious, too boring. Even though it 
 was meant to sort of highlight how 
 tedious and boring it is dealing with 
 Amazon, I decided no, even that was too 
 tedious. It was mostly me typing and you 
 can see in the chat window and I didn't 
 even narrate what I was typing. So it 
 was interspersed with some rants but 
 that was it. So 
 I've spared you that but I thought I'd 
 do a summary. So 
 I've mentioned the issue with Amazon. 
 It's very straightforward. We've been 
 selling product for years. It's called 
 Facin. It works with Din air 
 controllers. Hence the similar name. 
 And Amazon got a letter from Dacin 
 saying it's bit trademark. Amazon pulled 
 the listing froze 200 stock that we had 
 in Amazon and we've been battling with 
 them for months now. 
 Last month, December the 3rd, 
 went around circles with them. They kept 
 saying, "Well, you need to to appeal." I 
 said, "Well, we've been through the 
 appeal and you just keep asking for more 
 information. There is no resolution. 
 We've given up appealing. The matter's 
 now closed. We're not going to appeal 
 anymore. Send them back." And the 
 comment then was, "Well, we're holding 
 them for 36 days." Now, I did suggest 
 that they pay me rent for that, but they 
 didn't understand that. Holding them for 
 36 days, but after 36 days, you can have 
 them back. And it was very clear on 
 that. 
 So, I got pissed off, 
 but I decided I'll play their game. They 
 clearly said I'll have them back in 36 
 days. 
 It's been about 40 days now. So I 
 chatted with them yesterday and this was 
 the hour and 45 minute chat and it's 
 like speaking to a brick wall. 
 The the person I'm speaking to just 
 doesn't understand the concept. He's 
 saying well you need to appeal. I said 
 tried appealing. We've given up on that. 
 We need to send these documents. But 
 there aren't any documents to send. 
 They're not going to send any documents. 
 Just send them back. 
 At one point he's like well if you send 
 the documents how can we send them back? 
 And he's sort of like put them in a box 
 with our address on them. Put them in 
 the post. It's not complicated. 
 But he just, you know, he's got a mental 
 block with the whole concept that they 
 can send them back. They don't need me 
 to send documents or appeals to send 
 them back. They can do it. It is 
 physically possible for them to do it. 
 But no, it just that didn't that thought 
 didn't enter his head. It was a very 
 frustrating hour and 45 minutes and very 
 boring. As I said, 
 the summary of the call finally came in. 
 Um, and the email came up and said, 
 "Well, you've still got to send some 
 documents in." Basically, they're saying 
 they're going to hold them. In fact, at 
 one point, they even suggested they 
 might destroy them. 
 And to be clear, the whole Amazon 
 process for this is for handling fake 
 merchandise. So, if I was selling 
 trainers that had Mike instead of Nike 
 on them, then I can understand that 
 they're fake products and they want to 
 do something about it and take them off 
 the market. Although, I'm not really 
 sure they should be entitled to destroy 
 them without court order. 
 But this is not what's happening. These 
 are not fake DIN products. DIN don't 
 make development boards. They do make a 
 Wi-Fi adapter, but it doesn't look at 
 anything like this or work in the same 
 way. So, this isn't a fake DIN product 
 with a similar name to Fool People. It's 
 a different product and and their 
 process doesn't really get up to that in 
 the first place. So given that they're 
 basically trying to tackle potentially 
 fake products, their process is wanting 
 documents like the invoice for where I 
 got it, what supplier I got it from. So 
 if I had a supplier that said, "Yes, 
 this is genuine DIN um Wi-Fi 
 controllers, then maybe I'd get 
 somewhere." Or if I had, you know, if I 
 bought them from DIN. The problem is 
 we're not claiming that they're DIN. So 
 we don't have an invoice from a supplier 
 that says that they're genuine DIN. 
 Also, we made them. So, we don't have an 
 invoice for the splat. I mean, I've got 
 an invoice for the bare circuit boards, 
 but that's that's not the final product. 
 And they just argued up for that. Their 
 appeals process seems to lack a couple 
 of obvious steps. One is it's not a 
 breach of trademark. It's not a concept 
 they seem to understand. The other is 
 okay, it's a potential breach of 
 trademark. We're not saying it's breach 
 of trademark. Obviously, we're not 
 conceding that, especially as you might 
 destroy the goods, but it's a potential 
 VA trademark. So, we're prepared to pull 
 the products, withdraw the products from 
 sale, um, get them back, rebrand them, 
 so there's no confusion, there's no 
 there's no ambiguity. And again, that's 
 not an avenue they understand. I had a 
 chat today 
 and actually someone slightly more 
 helpful, although he did admit that 
 often they can't actually do anything to 
 fix problems. He has actually managed to 
 escalate it to a specialist team. 
 And the reason we got somewhere, I 
 think, is because the the summary from 
 previous chat wanted five things from 
 me. And these five things are invoices 
 and receipts, pricing information may be 
 removed, supplier information, name, 
 phone, number, address, and website. 
 Item description and quantities, import 
 or export documents, and documentation 
 showing that your fake products do not 
 infringe on the day trademark. 
 And I was able to basically tackle all 
 five points preemptively in the chat. 
 So when it comes to invoice and 
 receipts, there is no invoice of 
 receipt. We make these. When it comes to 
 supplier information, there is no 
 supplier. We make these. When it comes 
 to item description and quantities, 
 well, you know the item description and 
 how many you have. When it comes to 
 import and export documentations, well, 
 we make these. We didn't import or 
 export them. 
 documentation showing your faking 
 products do not infringe trademark. 
 Well, my answer there is what 
 documentation could we provide that 
 faking does not infringe other than the 
 daking trademark which states the 
 letters D, A, I, K, I, and N and not the 
 letters F I, A, A, I, K, I, and N. So, I 
 preemptively answered all five points. 
 So, that stock answer is not going to 
 work this time. And I actually got 
 through to someone who seemed to grasp 
 that concept. 
 Now obviously 
 I had to explain it's not a fake puppet 
 um and a few other things but basically 
 he's transferred it to a specialized 
 team 
 but the one other thing I have said is 
 if it helps if you choose not to return 
 them then this will result in a county 
 court claim to challenge your actions 
 and policy in front of a judge. This is 
 the course you are taking if you choose 
 not to return them. As you know, there 
 has been no legal decision in a court to 
 declare this product is a beach. 
 And it does not use the actual word day. 
 So, it's not automatically a beach. It 
 needs a legal decision. 
 It could only be decided by a court, not 
 by Amazon. 
 So, that's all been passed through to 
 them. So, we're hoping maybe, just 
 possibly this time, it'll get through to 
 a person who's not completely brain dead 
 and can actually answer it. Otherwise, 
 it will be a county court claim. 
 It may well be that Amazon terms and 
 conditions and policies clearly state 
 they can withhold goods and destroy them 
 at a whim like this. But even if it 
 does, I'd like to see that in front of a 
 judge. A judge may well say that that 
 policy and that contract is not a valid 
 thing. 
 Um, I mean these are quite cheap, but 
 this could be really expensive goods, a 
 lot of stock and purely on the 
 allegation of a trademark infringement. 
 They are holding them and threatening to 
 destroy them without any actual decision 
 or court order. 
 I'd like to see that in front of a 
 county court judge just to see what they 
 say and and it will be worth the I don't 
 know 50 quid or whatever it cost to do 
 that. 
 So, and Amazon probably won't want to 
 sit in a county court and defend their 
 retention or destruction of my property. 
 So, we will see. 
 So, fingers crossed. But yes, this is 
 how impossible Amazon are to deal with 
 on a day-to-day basis. 
 Good luck if you want to deal with 
 Amazon. And sadly, they're in such a 
 monopolistic position that it's hard not 
 to. 
 Thank you.