Chances are, if you are here, you got a claim from Copytrack.com. Out of all the false positives I have seen so far, I would wager they are in relation to WENN Rights International Ltd. Because I, too, went looking for who they were.
In this post, I want to address whether Copytrack.com is a scam. I see that everywhere, especially with posts that give what I consider legally unsound advice. It was the first thing I thought of when I read the email. After what I saw, I am going to blame ADHD; I have been absorbed into taking a deep dive, documenting and sharing my own experiences and what I found along the way. There is a lot to go through, and I have diverged in what I looked for, not just false claims.
In terms of false claims, I will have to bring in someone to help go through the complaints, as there are a lot. I would say half are valid. The other half either provided no evidence, was unclear, or actually took the image. I find myself looking again for valid claims because Copytrack may have filed claims against a legitimate copyleft but not represented the owner(s) and got paid. For more on my thoughts about this. Click here.
So, is Copytrack a scam or a useful tool against copyright theft?
There is a legitimate need for a solution that deals with copy theft. But I would not be writing about them if there was nothing wrong. My interest started when they sent me two claims over the same image on behalf of a company that does not have the right to the image (so far, they closed one based on ‘evidence’ I gave them”. As I keep saying, I am not a lawyer, but it is problematic that they may have gotten money over copyrighted content they do not represent. To be clear, I don’t think they are a scam by design. I don’t think they intentionally sent out notices to the wrong people. I will accuse them of apathy, sloth, and greed, likely not caring about the stress this puts on people who have no party to who they represent.
Taking measures to reduce and engage false claims will cut into Copytrack’s profit. As long as they face no consequences, they are not going to change.
As I have stated in other posts, I believe that is likely due to Copytrack’s client, Wenn, automating every part of the process from their end. Because, as they claim, they have over 12,000,000 images. Though I have considered they may have outsourced this to the lowest bidder and have done zero review of the contractor. I can see how having multiple people paid absurdly low wages could lead to two or more employees picking the same image. I doubt copytrack is set up for multiple people. As long as the money flows from Copytrack, why should they care? It also does not help that Copytrack.com has done nothing to reduce the rate of false positives… after all of these years. Nor do they put much effort into responding to dealing with anyone who contacts them.
Copytrack.com has reviews from actual users.
In the process of looking for other people’s experiences with false claims, I come across actual user reviews. The bulk of those reviews fall into two camps.
- Because they got paid, they will let you know their love.
- They give critical reviews.
I am going to focus on one review in the second group, as he gave the most insight. The first group does not. After someone asks for a solution, I see them quickly recommending Copytrack on various platforms. The fans of this company like to brag about how much they make. Honestly, who can blame them? If you have your content stolen, only to watch the offender make money off it, that’s going to boil your blood. I can not count how many times I have been there. Right now, I am watching offenders on Facebook get more traffic with my own content. Which is a whole other can of worms to open.
To those that had content stolen for years, if not decades, they offer a solution to find and go after the incriminator, and you would want that option. In addition to that, they also promise a 55% payout on past uses and a yearly license payout. That sounds awesome. You might not be inclined to be critical after you finally get a payout.
An honest review from Jermey of This Week in Blogging
This was the first critical review I came across. At first, I was going to skip it. But ignoring the positive aspects of Copytrack would not be a critical exploration on my part. Not to mention, until I found this review, most were high praise. This review lays out a road map for improvements.
Copytrack Review – Copyright Infringement Tracking Good in Theory
I was party-inclined to summarize the whole piece, but I think you should read it yourself. I want to focus on the claim Copytrack.com makes on its homepage regarding what Jermery shared.
115 Countries In which we have won cases
I have to wonder if that number is exaggerated because of what Jeremy said about cases:
The reason I call this only decent is that the service is somewhat lackluster in completing a claim.
Many of our claims were closed because the offending site was hosted in a country where it would not be cost-effective to make a claim or in other countries where Copytrack does not have legal representation. We’ve also had claims closed because Copytrack could not find an address associated with the website and also for the fact that they don’t go after non-commercial entities as well (this one we get).
More than half of our claims were closed on these grounds alone.
So far, I can not find what countries Copytrack claims to represent, but should I find it, I may reach out to Jeremy to see if he can tell me what countries he was not able to make claims in.
Coptrack.com does not appear to pursue profits made with stolen copyright
There is also a limit of 1,000 Euros. That is, in some cases, below the value of the images I have paid for. This means they do not factor in profits through copyrighted content. Meaning Copytrack.com would not be the company to use, should you seek compensation from those sales. There are a few cases I can think of that focused on profits gained from image theft.
Getty had to pay $1,200,000 million for selling images scraped from Twitter
Lara Jade Coton was paid $130,00 for the unauthorized use of her image on a DVD by TVX Films
I feel given her age, they should have paid a lot more.
VHT Studios vs. Zillow led to a $2,000,000 payout
https://www.realtrends.com/articles/zillow-to-pay-2-million-for-copyright-infringement/
Is Copytrack the Dollar Store of Copyright Enforcement?
The highest payout I have seen so far from Copytrack’s representation is $15,000.
https://www.copytrack.com/blog/news/copytracks-success-in-the-united-states
Does Copytrack ask for proof of ownership?
I did see that they would ask him to provide proof of sales history for a number. Which means there is some evidence provided on request. This makes me wonder if maybe Copytrack’s part in dealing with claims for Wenn is also automated or handled by an outsourced party. Because users like Jermery are highly likely to file legitimate complaints. Not handling those could cut into Copytrack’s profit. On the other hand, Wenn is not cost-effective to deal with, with the high volume of false positives. I wager that there is a low-cost method just for Wenn claims; I likely would need to wait out my last claim to see it.
Copytrack does offer a valid solution, but it needs to deal with the false claims problem if it wants to be seen as a legitimate service.
While Jermey addresses many of my questions. This was a review from 2022, so things can change. I will have to document my own experience at some time. I will likely revisit Jermery and other reviewers’ posts to compare my experience.
For the complete timeline of my experience with Copytrack/WENN Rights International Ltd, Click Here.
1 thought on “Is Copytrack.com a Scam or a Useful Tool Against Copyright Theft?”