This document concerns Aster’s software service and its merchant customers. Store product sales remain the responsibility of the actual merchant.
1. Contacts and responsibilities
The Platform entity is example, address example. General complaints: support@example.com. IP and legal notices: legal@example.com. Unlawful or dangerous content: abuse@example.com. Privacy: privacy@example.com. The merchant is the seller for store orders; the Platform helps identify that merchant and route requests, while its technical role does not excuse refusing complaints about its own conduct. This is a draft for legal review and does not replace special procedures required by applicable law.
2. Information for a report
Reports should include the complete relevant URL, store or order reference, content at issue, specific grounds, evidence and a contact name and email where possible. Rights complaints should describe the right, ownership or authority to act and the relationship between the challenged content and protected material. Only necessary information is requested, not public disclosure of unrelated identity or payment documents. Urgent safety reports that are anonymous or incomplete should still be assessed based on evidence and risk.
3. Intake, investigation and action
The proposed acknowledgment target for ordinary notices is two business days, with prompt escalation for personal safety, serious illegality or credential leakage. Review considers evidence, law and policy rather than treating an AI similarity score as an infringement finding. Specific content or actions may be restricted where necessary, with merchant notice of reason, scope, duration and appeal where permitted. Controlled evidence may be retained after removal without continuing public distribution of harmful material.
4. Intellectual-property counter-notices
A merchant challenging removal may provide the decision reference, original location, ownership or licensing evidence and a good-faith explanation. Where the US DMCA or another statutory counter-notice mechanism applies, counsel must configure required signatures, declarations, jurisdiction consent, service, forwarding and reinstatement periods; this general appeal does not replace them. US designated-agent and registration details are example, and no designation or safe-harbor protection may be claimed before actual registration and qualification.
5. Human review and repeated abuse
Both merchants and reporters may request human review based on material new evidence; reviewers must not merely repeat automated results. Malicious fabrication, repeated harassment or clear procedural abuse may be restricted after proportionate notice without blocking good-faith complaints. Repeat infringement or serious illegality may justify lawful contractual termination. Alleged, confirmed and overturned records must be distinguished rather than every notice treated as proven infringement.
6. Consumer remedies and external routes
Consumers may contact the merchant, payment provider, relevant authority or competent dispute body. This process requires no waiver of chargebacks, court proceedings or mandatory remedies and does not pause statutory deadlines. Applicable ADR bodies, registration details and participation obligations are example and must match the merchant’s markets and actual status. The discontinued EU ODR platform must not be presented as an available channel; use applicable active local complaint or ADR arrangements.
7. Privacy, evidence and legal requests
Complaints use only necessary personal data retained under the privacy notice and justified periods. Allegations may need to be shared so the responding party can answer, but unrelated sensitive information or reporter details must not be forwarded automatically. Law-enforcement and court demands require verification of authority, scope and legality, with customer notice where permitted. Proposed procedural targets do not reduce legally required protections or obstruct urgent relief, and the operative version and date must be recorded.