A seller can operate outside a brand's approved distribution network and still offer genuine goods. That may matter commercially, but it does not turn every listing into an intellectual-property violation.
The useful question is not simply whether the seller appears on an authorised list. It is whether the particular goods, listing content, claims, territory, and conduct engage a right or platform rule that supports action.
Authorisation status is a signal for review—not a substitute for a legal or policy basis.
01
“Unauthorized” is a commercial label
Brands use authorised networks to manage training, warranty, positioning, quality, territories, and pricing relationships. A seller outside that network may create genuine operational concerns.
Marketplace IP programmes have a narrower purpose. eBay states expressly that VeRO applies to IP rights, not distribution or pricing agreements, and that selective selling policies alone are not a reason to restrict resale without a valid IP issue.
02
Genuine resale can be lawful
The ability to control later resale depends on the right, the territory, how the goods entered the market, contractual relationships, and applicable exhaustion rules. For EU trademarks, Article 15 of the EU Trade Mark Regulation provides that the proprietor generally cannot prohibit use for goods placed on the EEA market by the proprietor or with consent, subject to legitimate reasons to oppose further commercialisation.
That is why “not on our dealer list” does not answer the IP question. The same listing may nevertheless raise a separate issue concerning authenticity, altered goods, misleading claims, copied content, or territory—but that issue must be assessed on its own facts.
03
Look for separate conduct, not a pretext
A responsible review does not search for any possible allegation merely to remove an unwanted seller. It asks whether the visible conduct genuinely engages an enforceable right or applicable marketplace policy.
Is authenticity disputed, or are the goods altered, copied, or materially different?
Does the listing misuse a sign, image, text, design, warranty statement, or affiliation claim?
Where are the goods offered, shipped, and protected rights relied upon?
Our guide to trademark, copyright, design rights, and counterfeit explains how those categories differ without turning them into a submission checklist.
04
Territory can change the answer
Marketplace pages may target buyers in several countries, while trademark and design protection is territorial and resale rules differ. A parallel import may be treated differently depending on where the goods were first placed on the market and where they are now offered.
A conclusion reached for one country-facing service therefore should not be copied automatically to another. The relevant operator, law, protected right, shipping destination, and platform rule all need to align.
05
The review can still create value
Separating non-actionable channel concerns from potential violations keeps the brand's effort focused. It also creates a clearer picture of where commercial measures, marketplace reporting, or legal advice may be appropriate.
“Not automatically removable” does not mean “ignore the seller.” It means classify the concern honestly, preserve the distinction, and act only where the rights, facts, and rules support the chosen route.
Sources