I updated my design this morning Kilroy KRK.64.
After that, my design was removed with the following message:
Dear Facer User:
We removed the watch face “Kilroy KRK.64” that you posted on Sunday, 19 July 2026 at 8:10:11 am +00:00 because our system flagged it as potentially infringing the Facer Terms of Service.
I’ve never had this happen with my designs before.
I have to say I’m very disappointed because I’ve put many hours of work into designing it.
You need to dispute the takedown with Facer. Most likely it is in what you named it or a layer name inside the face. I’ve had that happen before and they have reinstated the watchface.
@johnklein333 . Lesson Learned . DUPLICATE BEFORE YOU PUBLICATE .
Facer must have a Brand related to something in your Publication . May be the Kilroy Avatar attracted their Attention . ENJOY
Sh… looks like my Facer name “Tombot” is a trademark, but was registered after I joined Facer…
(they create robotic animals, check tombot.com)
I think I need to have a word with Facer what to do about it…
Until they come to facer for becoming one of the partner brands and eventually get accepted, you should be safe. Even though you were their partner with that name first, if you are not registered business entity, you could be at disadvantage.
Facer also has to follow the rules, and they need to ensure that users are acting within the law. Otherwise, Facer will run into trouble, and that’s the last thing they want.
It’s fine as it is for me now; I’ve updated my name and logo.
A bit of advice for Facer!
Please send an email warning before you remove a design.
I’m afraid Facer sending you an email before deleting a watchface just won’t happen. The bot will just remove the face and inform you that it has done so. The best thing to do is as @russellcresser always advises, is to duplicate the watchface BEFORE publishing it. Then if it gets taken down you still have copy.
Instead of deleting the face, they could just shove it back into draft, and just not not publish it with a real explanation as to why. This isn’t a lot to ask, and can be easily implemented, so there’s ZERO excuse for them not to do it, other than Facer just being their usual “We just don’t communicate with our users” mode.
Yes, would be nice to have a pre-publish check. It has been addressed with @Facer_Official several times.
I can only assume that Marvin is a 3rd party instance triggered upon publishing and that the interface between Facer and Marvin is limited to what you can do when something is found.