by Traverse Legal, reviewed by Enrico Schaefer - October 24, 2025 - Uncategorized
As attorneys specializing in representing Amazon sellers and brands selling through Seller Central, we know all too well how difficult it can be to get Amazon to cooperate and provide the specific information needed to fix sales issues. Amazon’s systems are flawed and often faulty, and its support systems are mostly inadequate. When algorithms suppress your product ASINs, it can cost you hundreds of thousands, or even millions, in lost revenue. Amazon support often refuses to engage and provide specific information to correct problems affecting sales. Amazon’s systems are imperfect, often in error, and Amazon’s support systems are largely inadequate. When your product’s ASIN is algorithmically suppressed, it can cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars in sales and, in some cases, millions of dollars in lost gross revenue.
Amazon sellers and brands often find themselves blindsided by sudden listing suspensions, unexplained “potential safety concern” flags, and spiraling risk scores—all stemming from issues far beyond their control, such as counterfeit sales and competitor attacks. For Amazon sellers seeking legal recourse, it’s essential to understand both the terminology Amazon uses internally and what actually appears in its communications with affected sellers.
In most cases, Amazon won’t tell you that your ASIN is in a risk pool or that the algorithm is working against you. Instead, you’ll receive canned emails with phrases like:
These messages don’t explain the real issue: that your ASIN’s risk score is polluted, and the algorithm is making decisions based on stale or inaccurate data.
In almost every case, our attorneys recommend filing an immediate Notice of Intent to Arbitrate under Amazon’s Services Business Solutions Agreement, so you can get in front of someone with the authority to actually resolve the problem. Amazon has 60 days to respond to that Notice of Intent to Arbitrate and assign attorneys to the matter. The Notice of Intent to Arbitrate sets a mediation process in motion which allows you to try and resolve the dispute and obtain more information concerning problems. When the issue is Ace and Suppression, most sellers need to take the additional step of filing an Arbitration Demand with the American Arbitration Association against Amazon in order to get discovery, in order to reveal the specific safety, suppression, or risk scoring issues affecting their listing.
On Amazon, all customer reviews are tied to a product’s ASIN (Amazon Standard Identification Number), not to specific sellers. This means that when counterfeiters or unauthorized sellers list under your ASIN, negative reviews from their buyers—including “Verified Purchase” reviews—are displayed on your authentic product’s page. These reviews often reference issues like defective packaging, toxicity, or unexpected reactions, which can significantly damage your product’s reputation. Even more problematic, these reviews directly influence Amazon’s internal “Safety Risk Score” and can lead to severe penalties, including listing suppression, without differentiating between genuine and illegitimate sellers.
Oftentimes, an Amazon seller suspects that their ASIN is being suppressed, but they can’t see what’s happening behind the scenes. The only way to determine whether Amazon is suppressing your ASIN is to look for emails and other communications through the platform which suggest suppression. Here is a list of the terminology you should look for:
“Potential Safety Concern” or “Potential Safety Issue”
“Listing Suppression due to Customer Complaints”
“Product Safety Review is Required”
“Account Health Rating” and “Account Health Dashboard” notifications, flagging risk factors
The content of these notices is focused on safety, performance, and compliance rather than disclosing algorithmic specifics. Amazon rarely uses its full internal terminology transparently in their Account Health Dashboard, Performance Notifications, or in responses to appeals. Occasionally, Amazon will mention “risk score threshold” or “safety verification” in more technical communications, but this is inconsistent and often reserved for higher-level escalation or through “Product Safety Team” interactions.
Behind the scenes, Amazon’s system assigns each ASIN a Safety Risk Score—a composite metric driven by the frequency and type of negative customer reviews, history of suppressions, known links to counterfeit or unauthorized sellers, and previous enforcement actions (including “Customer Concession Unit” or CCU interventions). Some of the most relevant internal terms and mechanisms we see in Amazon’s internal docuemntation include:
Risk Score: The algorithmic figure calculated for each ASIN, reflecting both the volume and severity of safety and authenticity concerns.
ASIN Risk Pool: Once an ASIN crosses a certain threshold of algorithmic risk, it’s categorized into a pool predisposed to re-suppression.
Automated Logic: Machine-learning models that continuously update suppression triggers based on review content, customer complaint semantics, and seller associations.
Bad Actor Correlation: Internal process for linking listings or offers to previous counterfeiters or problematic sellers.
Historical Enforcement Actions: Record of prior suppressions and manual interventions tied to an ASIN.
Crucially, after an ASIN is reinstated, it often remains tainted by legacy risk invisible to eh Seller! Amazon’s models treat these as “asymptomatic risk entities”—listings that appear clean but retain an algorithmic bias due to historical contamination. Any subsequent complaint is filtered through this risk context, hugely inflating the chance of a new suppression.
Amazon does have internal corrective tools, but these are rarely surfaced to sellers in ordinary communications. Many sellers never benefit from these interventions, especially when Amazon’s support and Product Safety contacts cite “resource constraints.” Often, Amazon does not fully remove counterfeit-era reviews, fails to enter Risk Overrides, or neglects risk score decay (gradual reduction of suppression weight over time). This leaves legitimate brands under perpetual scrutiny for issues long resolved. We’ve had numerous cases where Amazon says that it has corrected the problem, but arbitration reveals that they in fact did not. The tools that they have to clean up unwarranted unwarranted suppression on an ASIN are most often implemented as part of a settlement settlement between the Amazon seller and Amazon during the mediation or arbitration process.
Some essential (mostly internal) terms include:
Safety Verification Pass (SVP): A manual override certifying a product has cleared a higher-level safety review.
Risk Override/De-risking Note: A backend annotation temporarily neutralizing false positives.
Automated Logic Correction (ALC): An internal process retraining the suppression model based on confirmed legitimate sellers or re-categorized complaints.
If your prodcut listings have been hit by bogus reviews, competitor-driven attacks, or flagged for complaints associated with unrelated, unauthorized sellers—especially when they share the same ASIN—it is not simply a matter of “customer experience.” It is a flaw in Amazon’s risk scoring and safety algorithm framework, which can only be overcome by proper escalation, and if necessary, legal action through AAA arbitration.
Experienced and specialized legal counsel can help you navigate the itnernal appeals and dispute resolution process under Amazon’s terms:
We can interpret and appeal suppression decisions using correct Amazon terminology to trigger manual review
We can demand the removal or neutralization of bogus reviews tied to counterfeit incidents
We can ensure safety risk scores are de-escalated, Risk Overrides are entered, and suppressed products are truly rehabilitated in Amazon’s risk engine
We can advocate through arbitration, leveraging documented flaws in Amazon’s systems and internal admissions, to secure meaningful correction and damages
Here are some of the more important terms that you might see in the communications with Amazon as you’re trying to determine whether or not your product ASIN is being suppressed or flagged, as well as the internal terminology that we see in Amazon’s internal documents when we arbitrate these cases on behalf of Amazon sellers.
| Amazon External/Client-Facing Language | Internal/Algorithmic Terminology |
|---|---|
| “Potential Safety Concern” | Safety Risk Score, ASIN Risk Pool |
| “Suppression due to Customer Complaints” | Risk Vectors, Automated Logic, Historical Enforcement |
| “Account Health Rating/Dashboard” | Suppression Weight, Risk score decay |
| “Authenticity/Quality Concerns” | Bad Actor Correlation, Counterfeit Genesis |
| “Passed Safety Review” | Safety Verification Pass (SVP) |
| “Manual Investigation/Review” | Risk Override, De-risking Note |
| “Review Content/Customer Feedback” | Harm semantic triggers, Automated Logic Correction |
| “Technical Issue” | Model retraining, Automated Logic Correction (ALC) |
| “Product Safety/Potential Hazard” | Asymptomatic Risk Entity |
Brands stuck in a cycle of suppression due to counterfeit or gray-market contamination should be relentless in surfacing Amazon terminology in both their appeals and legal filings. By bridging Amazon’s customer-facing language with its algorithmic reality, sellers and their attorneys position themselves for successful arbitration and meaningful, lasting reinstatement.
If you’ve been caught in this algorithmic crossfire, knowledgeable legal intervention can help break the cycle and restore your brand’s standing—both to Amazon’s system and your customers.
References:
📚 Get AI-powered insights from this content:
As a founding partner of Traverse Legal, PLC, he has more than thirty years of experience as an attorney for both established companies and emerging start-ups. His extensive experience includes navigating technology law matters and complex litigation throughout the United States.
We’re here to field your questions and concerns. If you are a company able to pay a reasonable legal fee each month, please contact us today.
This page has been written, edited, and reviewed by a team of legal writers following our comprehensive editorial guidelines. This page was approved by attorney Enrico Schaefer, who has more than 20 years of legal experience as a practicing Business, IP, and Technology Law litigation attorney.
