COPYTRACK: Scam or legitimate?
German lawyer explains

Copytrack & YayImages: fake or legit?

Recently, there has been an increase in complaints about emails from Copytrack. Out of the blue, alleged copyright infringements are being claimed.

In this blog post, you will learn about the international background that will take you from Germany to Norway, China and North America, and what you can do in response.

**For the German version of this post, please click here.**

1. Received an email from Copytrack? Me too!

Unexpected “authorization request” from Copytrack

In mid-October 2024, I received an email from Copytrack containing an “authorization request”. I had never heard of Copytrack before.

I was quite surprised by the content of the email. I was accused of possibly not having a license for an image posted on my law firm’s website.

According to the email, Copytrack, a German company based in Berlin, was not acting on its own behalf, but on behalf of Yay Images. Yay Images is a stock photography company based in Norway.

The accusation was unexpected for me in several ways. Firstly, I am a lawyer and only use licensed or royalty-free images on this website. Secondly, I bought the image Copytrack is referring to with a valid license from Shutterstock more than ten years ago (in 2014!).

In the screenshot below, taken from the Shutterstock website, you can see the image Copytrack is complaining about on the left and my license highlighted in red on the right.

Copytrack’s email in behalf of YayImages

In the email, Copytrack demands proof that I have a valid license to use the image. Copytrack also “offers“ to close the matter if I pay compensation of €350.00 or purchase an annual license for €389.59.

Below is Copytrack’s original email in German. English “authorization requests“ (sometimes labeled “infringement notice”) usually have the same structure.

The request for proof of license and the payment “offer“ are remarkable for what they lack:

In their request of authorization, Copytrack provides no proof that they were commissioned by Yay Images or that they own any rights to the image.

» What this means for you is explained below.

2. Fraud, scam or legitimate?

Why does Copytrack write such an email?

Copytrack seems to automatically search the internet for images in the Yay Images database that are used on third-party websites like mine. (By the way, you can easily do such a search yourself, e.g. with Google’s Reverse Image Search.)

As soon as Copytrack finds images on a third-party website, they automatically send a standardized email to the owner of the website in question. Depending on the recipient, the email is written in German, English or any other appropriate language.

In doing so, Copytrack uses a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They hope that the recipient does not have a valid license and is “stupid“ enough to accept the “payment offer“.

Copytrack certainly does not thoroughly check who they are writing to and whether they have a valid claim. Otherwise Copytrack would hardly be so audacious as to accuse a law firm of copyright infringement.

A shady business model but not necessarily fraudulent

There is nothing inherently illegal about taking action against copyright infringement. Photographers are entitled to fair use of their art and to fair compensation.

The problem with Copytrack, however, is that their “authorization requests“ are extremely prone to error. Far too many recipients of Copytrack’s emails actually have a valid license, or the images Copytrack is referring to are royalty-free in the first place. Quite a few posts on the internet and social media bear witness to this.

My conclusion: Copytrack’s approach makes it a highly dubious company, but it does not necessarily constitute a scam.

The reviews of Copytrack and Yay Images also speak for themselves (screenshots from trustpilot.com):

3. How to deal with Copytrack: My response

Copytrack demands proof of a valid license for the image. On one hand, it is certainly true that you should comply with this request. However, this should only be done after Copytrack has met their own obligations.

First and foremost, Copytrack must prove all the legal facts that would justify their “authorization request”.

These legal facts include:

• the alleged commission by Yay Images (or any other client on whose behalf Copytrack claims to be acting);
• the purported license agreement between the licensor and Yay Images as licensee;
• the purported licensor being the original copyright owner of the image.

Accordingly, I sent an email to Copytrack asking for proof of these facts. I also told them that I would not provide proof of my license until Copytrack had fulfilled their obligations.

4. Email ping pong with Copytrack

Copytrack’s second email providing insufficient proof

Copytrack responded to my request within just a few days. The speed of their response was probably due to the fact that I am a lawyer and legal letters always carry a bit more weight.

However, Copytrack did not provide the information I requested. Instead, they sent me a digitally signed “confirmation of ownership“.

This is what the document looks like (I have highlighted the most important aspects):

First of all, it is striking that the statement was issued by a company based in China (Hong Kong). As it turns out, this China-based Doublesix Ltd has aquired Yay Images in 2018/19.

Alex G., the representative for Doublesix Ltd, is based in Canada. He seems to specialize in sales and marketing and may be one of the goons looking for potential copyright infringements.

The following screenshot has been taken from the rocketreach.co website:

What else can be deduced from the “confirmation of ownership“?

The document claims that the original copyright holder and licensor of the image is someone who goes by the pseudonym „Feverpitched“ and that there is an alleged licensing agreement between them and Doublesix Ltd.

The following aspects are worth noting:

• What natural or legal person is behind the pseudonym „Feverpitched“? No proof provided!
• Is the licensor „Feverpitched“ really the author and original copyright holder of the image in question? No proof provided!
• Is there really an agreement between „Feverpitched“ and Doublesix Ltd entitling the latter to claim damages? No proof provided!

My second response to Copytrack

It is quite astonishing: Copytrack demands proof of a valid license. At the same time, however, Copytrack is unable or unwilling to provide sufficient proof of their own legal position.

I therefore replied to Copytrack with yet another email. Once again, I informed them that their proof was insufficient and that I would continue to insist on receiving the requested information about their legal position.

5. Conclusion: Stay persistent and write a review!

Copytrack only submitted the requested information in their third email. Only then did I provide Copytrack with proof of the Shutterstock license I had purchased over a decade ago.

Copytrack subsequently closed the case and admitted that there had been no copyright infringement.

This is the final email from Copytrack’s legal department (screenshot in German):

In any case, even if you have a valid license, be persistent! Always insist that Copytrack first prove their own legal position.

By doing so, you can disrupt Copytrack’s way of doing business. The company’s aim is to extract a relatively small amount of money from its “victims“ as quickly as possible. The more time Copytrack has to spend on a case, the less profitable it will be.

And last but not least: Write a review about Copytrack and YayImages on the Internet, e.g. on Trustpilot, Yelp, Google, etc. This way, any user can quickly get a helpful idea about Copytrack / Yay Images and their shady business practices.

© C.D. Franz, Attorney at Law

This blog post is for general information purposes only, is not exhaustive and is not continuously updated. It does not constitute legal advice.