Depop review: 5-star review seller and depop inappropriately suspended my account and did not transfer my earnings

I filed with BBB and Depop

My account has been suspended. I had 1 remaining item in transit and several I had purchased and NO communication capabilities with either buyer or seller. Furthermore, there is a balance in "MY" account I am unable to deposit. Had appropriate protocol been implemented, I wouldn't worry with it. However, Due to Depop acting impulsively, out of unvalidated fear, unreasonable evidence, and without further investigation/exploration, I demand the funds that are legally mine $21.? be deposited into the bank account provided to my Depop account. I believe a better way of suspending an account in the future could be a bit more thoughtful for all the other parties involved to ensure that last little bit of customer and seller service is provided. I didn’t get ALL 5 star review rating for being anything less. I also feel there are bias of account suspended status as I have several names and accounts that were reinstated during the same time frame of the status of my own account. Here I am unable to get a responding email of numerous “contact us” I have submitted.
Additionally, You’re misunderstanding how copyright infringement and the first sale doctrine work. We’re talking about Pop Mart submitting copyright infringement complaints against people reselling authentic, legally purchased merchandise. That’s entirely different from someone manufacturing unauthorized fan merchandise. Under 17 U.S.C. § 109(a), the first sale doctrine, copyright owners generally cannot control the subsequent resale of genuine, lawfully made physical products after ownership has transferred. If someone legally purchases an authentic Labubu or other Pop Mart collectible, they generally have the right to resell that item without Pop Mart’s permission. Your Etsy fan-art comparison is legally flawed. Creating unauthorized reproductions of copyrighted characters is not the same as reselling an original, authentic product manufactured by the rights holder. And whether someone charges retail price, double, or triple is irrelevant to whether that resale constitutes copyright infringement. Copyright law does not prohibit selling genuine collectibles above retail price simply because the manufacturer or other consumers dislike the markup. The real issue here is the use of copyright complaints to remove legitimate resale listings. Under 17 U.S.C. § 512(f), knowingly making material misrepresentations in DMCA infringement notices can create legal liability. That doesn’t automatically establish that Pop Mart (Depop) has violated the law, but it illustrates why copyright takedown procedures aren’t supposed to be tools for suppressing lawful competition in the secondary market. You can absolutely disagree with reselling, criticize inflated prices, or refuse to support resellers. But your personal opinion about resale pricing doesn’t override established copyright law.
Finally, when listing a product on YOUR platform, Popmart is a designated “Name brand” option that your platform created in supporting brand name sells. The items in question are authentic and were purchased legally including sales tax. As a collector I am allowed to resell items I no longer want, need or desire.
Item 1- Pop Mart The Monsters Labubu Zimomo Angel in Clouds WITH TOTE! Listing photos included it's original popmart shipping box with certified plaque. Item 2 Popmart Pucky Time Traveler Baby Figurine is sealed. The photos of the sealed box is indeed a representation of the product being authentic with trademarks and special stamps. It is why there were numerous photos submitted on both. Both are authentic and appropriate for resell without violating any infringement Beijing suggested that put the fear of God in Depop administration avoiding advocacy for their legitimate sellers. Shame on you. Deposit my money.