Photography & imagery
Stock reuse, cropped-out watermarks, product shots lifted into competitor listings, and portraits republished without a model or usage release.
Intellectual property enforcement
Someone published your photograph, your video, your writing, your design or your software without asking. We find every copy, build an evidence record that stands up, and pursue removal — or paid licensing — on your behalf.
What we act on
Copyright attaches the moment a work is fixed in a tangible form. What changes between these categories is where the copies surface and which channel gets them taken down.
Stock reuse, cropped-out watermarks, product shots lifted into competitor listings, and portraits republished without a model or usage release.
Full re-uploads, clipped segments monetised on other channels, and course material redistributed through closed groups and file lockers.
Unlicensed sync in short-form video, sampled tracks released commercially, and podcast episodes re-hosted under another name.
Scraped articles, translated copies published without permission, and books split into chapters and sold through unauthorised sellers.
Templates resold, illustrations printed onto merchandise, and interface work copied wholesale into competing products.
Cloned storefronts, impersonation accounts, domains registered in bad faith, and paid ads run against your name.
Licensed code redistributed outside its terms, nulled plugins and themes, cracked builds, and repositories republished with the attribution stripped out.
Send it anyway. We assess whether a claim is viable before you commit to anything, and we will tell you plainly when the answer is no.
Start an assessment →
Case procedure
Every case moves through the same five stages in the same order. You are told which stage you are in and what the next one requires.
You file a report describing the work and where you found it. We confirm you hold the rights you are claiming — original files, publication dates, contracts, assignments — because a claim built on shaky ownership fails later, expensively.
We search beyond the copy you already found. Reverse image and audio matching, text fingerprinting and domain records usually surface further instances on mirrors, resale sites and accounts you did not know existed.
Each instance is captured with a timestamped screenshot, the full URL, archived page source, server and registrar details, and the identity of the host. This record is what makes a notice actionable rather than an email that gets ignored.
We serve the correct notice through the correct channel — platform rights portal, host abuse desk, registrar, payment processor or ad network — and escalate when the first route stalls.
Most matters end with removal. Where the use is commercially valuable, we can pursue a retroactive licence instead. Where the infringer contests the claim or the loss is substantial, we hand you a complete file and refer you to qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.
Standards of practice
Filing a takedown means declaring, under penalty of perjury in several jurisdictions, that you own the work and that the use is unauthorised. Careless notices get accounts sanctioned and claims dismissed. Ours are checked before they leave.
Protection of works is automatic. It does not depend on registration, notice, or any formality — and it applies across every country bound by the Convention.Principle of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Article 5(2)
Common questions
No. Under the Berne Convention, copyright exists from the moment a work is created and fixed in a tangible form. Registration is not a precondition for protection or for filing a takedown. It does matter in some jurisdictions — in the United States, for instance, registration affects your ability to bring an infringement suit and to claim statutory damages — so we will tell you when it is worth doing.
Territory matters less than you would expect, because enforcement usually runs through the platform or host rather than the courts. A video on a global platform is removed under that platform's policy regardless of where the uploader sits. Cross-border litigation is a different matter, and that is where we refer you to counsel.
No. Attribution is not a licence. Someone can name you as the creator and still be infringing, unless your licence terms say attribution alone is sufficient — as some Creative Commons licences do. Read the licence you actually published under.
Sometimes. Where a work has been used commercially, a retroactive licence is often faster and more realistic than a damages claim. We can open that negotiation. We do not, however, send demands for payment as a substitute for a genuine claim, and we will not act on a claim we do not believe is sound.
We are not a law firm and we do not provide legal advice or representation. We do not file lawsuits, appear in court, or act as a regulator. We cannot compel anyone to do anything — our leverage comes from platform policy, host terms of service and statutory notice regimes. When a matter needs a lawyer, we say so.
The question is only whether anyone is looking. Filing a report costs nothing and takes about ten minutes.