A removed listing comes back in one of two ways: the seller objects with an invoice and the listing is republished, or the same product is listed again in the same or a new store. In both cases the work follows the same order: detect and record the listing again, link it to the earlier complaint file, add a new document that was not in the first complaint, and send the notice again through the platform's official channel. The lawyer assesses the legal routes against a repeat seller.
Why does a removed listing come back?
Article 9(3) of Law No. 6563 on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce sets up a two-step procedure. The marketplace removes the product on the right holder's complaint based on information and documents and notifies the seller and the right holder. If the seller objects with information and documents showing the opposite, the marketplace republishes the product. So the first removal is not final; the seller's right to object is written into the law.
There are three typical ways a listing returns:
| Situation | What happened | Where to look first |
|---|---|---|
| Return after objection | The seller submitted an invoice or supply document, and the listing is live again at the same link | The seller's document and the grounds of the first complaint |
| New listing in the same store | The removed product was listed again under a new listing number | Images, description and pricing pattern |
| Same listing in a new store | The same product appeared under another store name | Shared images, contact details, shipping address, price |
What happens if the seller objects?
Articles 12 to 14 of the 2022 regulation set out the objection procedure and 48- and 24-hour periods; their execution was stayed by the 10th Chamber of the Council of State (Danıştay) in May 2023, and as of November 2026 we have found no published information that the stay has been lifted. Today the details of the procedure are largely set by the platforms' own pages.
Hepsiburada's application process page is a good example. According to the page, a seller's objection includes the invoice or equivalent documents and the contracts and documents tracing the chain back from the seller to the right holder or to those who put the product on the market with the right holder's permission. The platform's review is limited to the documents the seller submits. The most important rule is this: unless new documents proving the infringement are submitted, complaints about the same product and the same claim are not processed. Dolap's user agreement lists the same elements for complaints and objections.
In practice this means that sending the same file a second time does not work. What sets the second complaint apart from the first is the new document.
What can count as a "new document" in a second complaint?
The brand owner and its lawyer decide which document to use. Examples considered in practice:
- Test purchase. The product bought from the listing, with its invoice and packaging. It can be compared with the invoice the seller submitted in the objection.
- Showing that the invoice relates to other goods. If the product code, quantity or date on the invoice does not match the listed product, the difference is documented.
- Expert or authorised service assessment. A technical review showing that the product is not genuine.
- A break in the supply chain. The source the seller names does not appear on the brand's authorised distribution list.
- The link between the new listing and the earlier case. Dated records showing the same images, description and contact details.
Selling a genuine product outside authorised channels is a different matter. Under Article 152 of Industrial Property Law No. 6769, acts relating to products put on the market by the right holder or with its consent fall outside the scope of the right. If the seller's invoice is real and relates to the genuine product, a new complaint will probably end the same way. We explain this distinction in authorization status in brand usage.
How do you build evidence continuity?
In a repeat infringement, what decides the strength of the case is the record kept from day one. For each case, the following should sit in the same file:
- The date of the first detection, the listing link and the screenshot.
- Which channel the complaint was sent through, on what date and with which documents.
- The platform's reply and the date the listing came down.
- The seller's objection and the document submitted, if the platform shared it.
- The date the listing returned and the new link.
- The shared elements linking the new listing to the earlier case.
- The date of the second complaint, the new document and the outcome.
This order leaves no gap between the first complaint and each later step. A timestamp and source link next to the screenshot also help show that the record was not changed afterwards. We explain what to record and when in how to collect evidence of brand infringement.
What should you check after removal, and how often?
To see a return early, the listing and the seller are checked again after removal. The schedule below is a suggestion, not a legal deadline:
| When | Check |
|---|---|
| Right after the removal notice | Has the listing really gone, and what does the same link show? |
| First week | Has the same product appeared in the seller's store under a new listing? Has an objection notice arrived? |
| First month | Do the same images and text appear in other stores? |
| After that | Alerts in regular scans for the same seller and the same images |
The same logic applies on social media: a closed account can be replaced by a new one with a similar name. We cover this in how to deal with fake brand accounts on social media.
How do you report a repeat infringer to platforms?
Some platforms state in their own policies that they deal with repeat infringement at account level:
- Amazon. Under the Amazon.com.tr conditions of use and sale, after receiving a complaint Amazon may take actions including terminating repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances.
- Meta. Meta's third-party intellectual property policy says that it removes accounts that repeatedly violate it. Reports are accepted from the right holder or an authorised representative.
- Turkish marketplaces. The notice goes through the platform's official channel: the seller panel, the platform's form, a notary or KEP, Türkiye's registered electronic mail system. We list which platform publishes which channel in marketplace IP complaint channels.
A repeat notice briefly lists the dates and outcomes of earlier complaints and shows the new listing's link to the earlier case. There is no complaint-count threshold; the platform assesses each notice under its own rules.
Social networks also have a duty to reply. Under paragraph 3 of Additional Article 4 of Law No. 5651, social network providers with more than one million daily accesses from Türkiye must give a positive or negative answer to applications by individuals within forty-eight hours at the latest; negative answers must give reasons.
Which routes exist outside the platform?
The platform complaint is not the only route against a repeat seller. Article 149 of the Industrial Property Law covers preventing and stopping the infringement, and Article 159 covers preliminary injunctions. Article 30(7) provides that no penalty is imposed on a person who sells counterfeit goods if that person discloses where the goods came from and helps identify the producer; this rule can open the way to the source. For a criminal complaint, the six-month period in Article 73 of the Turkish Criminal Code starts from the date the act and the offender become known. The lawyer assesses which route to use and when. We cover the criminal and civil routes in what is the penalty for selling counterfeit goods.
How does Authex track listings that come back?
Authex keeps monitoring the listing and the seller after a notice. For a finding detected again in later scans, the first and last seen dates are kept and the finding is flagged as recurring. Because listing images are compared with your official product photos by visual similarity, new listings opened with the same photos are found as well. New listings from sellers with earlier infringement records move up the risk ranking.
For each new finding, an evidence file and a notice draft are prepared; earlier records stay in the same case. The decision to send the repeat notice and the sending belong to the brand team or its lawyer, and the removal decision to the platform. The scope is on the marketplace monitoring page.
Frequently asked questions
Can I report the same listing again with the same documents?
According to Hepsiburada's page, complaints about the same product and the same claim are not processed unless new documents proving the infringement are submitted. A second complaint should include a document that was not in the first file.
If the listing reappears in a new store, does the earlier complaint still apply?
Each listing and store needs its own notice. The new notice can show the listing's link to the earlier case through shared images and text.
After how many complaints is a seller account closed?
Platforms do not publish a number. Amazon and Meta state in their terms and policies that they can close the accounts of repeat infringers; the platform decides.
Can I see the invoice the seller submitted in the objection?
The law provides that removal and republication are notified to the right holder. Whether the seller's document is passed on to you depends on the platform's practice. If you need the document, your lawyer can assess how to request it.
This article is for general information. Platform pages and requirements can change; seek your lawyer's support in a specific case.
Sources
- Law No. 6563 on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce (Article 9), in Turkish
- Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers, Official Gazette, 29 December 2022, No. 32058 (Articles 12-14), in Turkish
- Webrazzi, articles of the e-commerce regulation stayed by the Council of State, 10 May 2023, in Turkish
- Hepsiburada, application process for IP infringements, in Turkish
- Dolap, Kullanıcı Sözleşmesi (user agreement), in Turkish
- Amazon.com.tr, Conditions of Use and Sale, in Turkish
- Meta Transparency Center, Intellectual Property
- Law No. 5651 (Additional Article 4), in Turkish
- Industrial Property Law No. 6769 (Articles 30, 149, 152, 159), in Turkish
- Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237 (Article 73), in Turkish
