Take-down and delisting procedure: documents to prepare
A take-down and delisting request removes an infringing listing from a marketplace and pulls the disputed token from active trading. To start, you need proof of your right to the underlying asset, evidence of the infringing listing, and a formal notice addressed to the platform. Before drafting that notice, check what the record can actually support: When there is nothing to establish, we say so, and a notice built on a gap in the record rarely survives a platform's first review. This page sets out the documents, the stages, and the point after which a delisting is difficult to reverse.
Practical consequence
Filing a take-down notice does not itself remove a token. It opens a review window inside the platform's own compliance process, and during that window the listing usually stays live unless the platform applies a precautionary freeze. Delisting is the harder step. Once a compliance team pulls a token from trading, reversing that decision needs a fresh submission and, in most cases, a waiting period before the token can be relisted.
Treat delisting as close to final. A rushed or incomplete file does not just fail on the day — it also leaves the platform holding a record of a weak submission, which colours how a second attempt gets read.
Documents to prepare
Five items form the core of most files. Missing any one of them is the usual reason a platform declines to open a review.
| Document | What it shows | Typical source |
|---|---|---|
| Proof of right to the underlying asset | Ownership, licence, or authorised control over what the token represents | Registry extract, licence agreement, transfer record |
| Record of the infringing listing | Token identifier, marketplace URL, timestamp, price at the time of capture | Screenshot, page archive, platform export |
| Chain-of-provenance file | Sequence of transfers from origin to the current dispute, without gaps | Wallet history, prior notices, contract logs |
| Formal notice | Written request naming the platform, the listing, and the action requested | Drafted for this submission |
| Authority to act | Confirmation that the person filing may submit on the asset's behalf | Power of attorney or internal authorisation |
If the disputed token reached the marketplace through a formal listing process, the stages leading up to that listing follow a separate track: How listing preparation token issuance runs in practice. That file does not overlap with a take-down request, but it often explains why a listing looks the way it does.
Steps to follow
- Assemble the provenance file yourself, in date order, before any contact with the platform.
- Capture the infringing listing in full — screenshot, URL, and timestamp — before it can be amended.
- Have counsel draft the notice, naming the listing, the right relied on, and the action requested.
- Submit the notice through the platform's designated compliance channel, not through general support.
- Log the submission date and track the platform's stated response window.
- If delisting is granted, request written confirmation before treating the matter as closed.
Who decides
The platform's own compliance or trust-and-safety team decides whether to act on a take-down notice. For a full delisting, the decision usually sits with a separate listing or risk committee inside the same organisation. Neither body is a court or a regulator, and its decision does not settle who holds the underlying right — it only settles whether the token stays listed on that platform. A parallel dispute over ownership runs on its own track and does not pause or resume automatically once the platform has ruled.
Two common scenarios
- If the platform runs its own provenance-verification step, submit the same documents through that channel first. A parallel notice filed outside the built-in process usually gets queued behind it.
- If the other side disputes your right to the asset, the platform typically pauses the take-down and asks both sides for competing evidence, which shifts the matter toward a dispute process rather than a straightforward removal.
- If the platform does not respond inside its stated window, escalate through the channel named in its own policy. Repeating the same notice rarely moves it up the queue.
What this page does not cover
This page does not establish whether you hold a right to the asset in question, and it does not calculate what a check of that kind would cover. A separate report answers that question for a specific jurisdiction and asset: Asset in Denmark and its limits sets out what such a file covers and where it stops.
Where the dispute sits on the other side of the ledger — a debtor rather than a disputed asset — a different starting point applies: Debtor report before starting enforcement and its limits. Neither file replaces the take-down notice; both sit upstream of it, clarifying what can be claimed before a notice is drafted.
Reviewed
Reviewed against current EU crypto-asset regulation and prevailing marketplace policy in November 2025. Platform procedures change faster than the rules behind them; check the specific platform's current policy before relying on any timeline described here.
Related reading
Royalty enforcement: documents to prepare covers a related file — proving what is owed on a tokenised right that is already trading, rather than removing it from sale.
Aurelis reviews take-down and delisting files daily. Send the listing and what you already hold on it; the first response comes from a partner, in minutes, during working hours. A price for the work follows within one working day.
FAQ
How long does take-down and delisting procedure take in practice?
Timing depends on the platform's own process, not on a fixed clock. A straightforward notice with a full file can clear a first review within days. A disputed one, where the other side contests the right relied on, can run for weeks while both sides submit evidence.
Which documents are needed to start?
Four things: proof of your right to the underlying asset, a full record of the infringing listing, a provenance file without gaps, and a formal notice naming the requested action. A platform receiving less than this typically returns the file rather than opening a review.
What happens if the other side does not respond?
Silence does not stop the process. The platform still reviews the notice on the strength of what you submitted, and a documented lack of response can support the case for removal — though it is not, by itself, proof that the underlying claim is correct.