English reviewer layer

Full site in German
DMCA AgencyGermany

Methodology

How a case is handled

The full operational workflow — from intake to closing report. It is published on purpose, because the quality of a notice depends almost entirely on what happens before it is filed.

Twelve steps

  1. Intake

    Recording who is reporting and which work is affected.

    • Who is reporting and in what role
    • Which work is concerned
    • What prompted it
    • An intake receipt — not yet a case reference

  2. Rights basis

    Checking what the entitlement rests on.

    • Authorship, exclusive licence or authorization
    • Scope and reach
    • Evidence for the chain of rights

  3. Original work

    The work is documented so that it can be referenced unambiguously later.

    • Title and type of work
    • First publication and where it sits
    • Publication date, where evidenced
    • Duration for time-based works
    • Work reference — not year-bound

  4. Reported use

    The specific location, not the approximate neighbourhood.

    • Full URL
    • Platform and account
    • Channel or uploader
    • Relevant timestamps
    • Extent of the copying
    • Time of observation

  5. Evidence mapping

    The reported use is mapped onto the protected work, point by point.

    • Which part of the work was taken
    • Where it appears in the reported location
    • Editing: crop, mirroring, audio swap, speed
    • A blanket accusation against a whole channel is not a mapping

  6. Eligibility review

    Is copyright the right route at all?

    • Any apparent licence or permission
    • Quotation, parody, reporting or commentary
    • Platform-specific exceptions
    • Signs that the matter is really about trade marks or personality rights

  7. Authorization review

    Does the authorization cover exactly this case?

    • State of the authorization: only ACTIVE permits a submission
    • Work, platform and period inside the scope
    • Signing authority checked
    • If it is missing, the case moves to AUTHORIZATION_NEEDED

  8. Human review

    No notice leaves the building without a person releasing it. There is no automated bulk filing.

    • Factual, checkable wording
    • Platform-specific mandatory fields complete
    • Representative relationship stated

  9. Submission

    Through the recipient’s designated official reporting route.

    • The correct recipient, not a general contact form
    • The full legal name of the authorized individual where required
    • The notice gets its own reference

  10. Follow-up

    Queries, deadlines and interim states are actively tracked.

    • Answering platform queries (NEED_MORE_INFORMATION)
    • Supplying what was requested
    • Treating counter-notifications as their own step

  11. Status reconciliation

    The actual state is kept current — including when it changes afterwards.

    • Outcome per reported location
    • Reappearance recorded as a new use of the same work
    • Counter processes kept separate from the outcome

  12. Closing report

    The case is documented with the actual outcome — including when that outcome is "rejected".

    • Work count and reported-use count kept apart
    • Open counter processes shown separately
    • What was not achieved is in the report too

One work, many uses

This mapping is the core of the methodology, and the exact place where reports can turn dishonest.

A protected work may have been copied in any number of places. Each of those places is a separate reported use: its own URL, its own account, its own timestamps, its own outcome. They are not collapsed merely because they concern the same work — collapsing them would delete exactly the information the case rests on.

Conversely, the work stays one work. That is why the work reference is not year-bound: a video from 2019 that resurfaces in 2026 continues under the same work reference, and only that makes a pattern visible across years.

Relationships in the case model

1 case → many reported URLs
One case bundles the reported uses that belong together.
1 case → one or more protected works
A case may cover several works of the same rightsholder.
1 work → many reported uses
The same work may be copied in any number of places. Those uses are not collapsed merely because they share a work.
1 authorization → one or more cases within its scope
The scope of the authorization bounds which cases it covers.

Quantities reported separately

Reported uploads
Number of individual uploads notices referred to.
Reported uses
Number of reported locations. Several locations of the same work count more than once.
Unique works
Number of protected works involved. A work counts once, however often it was copied.

Case status

We use separate states for separate facts. A filed notice is not a removal, and an acknowledgement is not a success. The canonical value sits under each label.

Before submission

The case is with us; nothing has gone out.

  • DraftDRAFT
  • Intake receivedINTAKE_RECEIVED
  • Eligibility reviewELIGIBILITY_REVIEW
  • Evidence neededEVIDENCE_NEEDED
  • Authorization neededAUTHORIZATION_NEEDED
  • Awaiting clientAWAITING_CLIENT
  • Ready for submissionREADY_FOR_SUBMISSION

With the recipient

The notice is filed. The decision now sits with the platform.

  • SubmittedSUBMITTED
  • ProcessingPROCESSING
  • Action neededACTION_NEEDED
  • Need more informationNEED_MORE_INFORMATION

Outcome

The actual outcome — including the ones nobody likes to publish.

  • RemovedREMOVED
  • Already unavailableALREADY_UNAVAILABLE
  • RejectedREJECTED

Counter process

A separate process. It runs alongside the outcome, not instead of it.

  • Counter-notification receivedCOUNTER_NOTIFICATION_RECEIVED
  • Escalation reviewESCALATION_REVIEW

Preservation

  • Legal holdLEGAL_HOLD

Closed

The matter is finished and documented.

  • WithdrawnWITHDRAWN
  • Administratively closedADMINISTRATIVELY_CLOSED
  • ClosedCLOSED
  • ReopenedREOPENED

What is not the same thing

These three equations are a common way to make an outcome look better than it is. They do not occur in our records.

  • Submittedis notRemoved
  • Processingis notRemoved
  • Already unavailableis notRemoved
  • Administratively closedis notClosed

Already unavailable deserves its own explanation. Content may have gone because the other side deleted it, because the account closed, or because a different notice landed. Until that can be evidenced, this outcome is not recorded as a removal we caused.

States that coexist

A case carries several independent states. A counter-notification does not overwrite the original outcome.

Removal outcome removalOutcome
What happened to the reported content.
Verification status verificationStatus
Whether an authorization check was requested, and how it was answered.
Counter-notification status counterNotificationStatus
Tracked separately; it does not overwrite the original outcome.
Escalation status escalationStatus
Whether the matter is queued for review beyond the notice process.

When the other side answers

A counter-notification is a provided-for step in the procedure, not an accusation. It is tracked as its own process and does not overwrite the outcome recorded so far.

  1. 01

    Counter-notification received

    The recipient forwards the counter-notification. The matter is flagged; the outcome recorded so far stays as it is.

  2. 02

    Matter paused

    No further notices go out on the same subject matter while the point is open.

  3. 03

    Client informed

    The client receives the content of the counter-notification and the period the recipient has stated — in full, including when both are unwelcome.

  4. 04

    Deadline recorded

    As its own deadline record of type LEGAL_ACTION_RESPONSE, with trigger, due date and time zone.

  5. 05

    Required next step assessed

    What the recipient requires and what the client wants to do — not who is ultimately right.

  6. 06

    External legal counsel, if required

    If the route ahead needs a legal assessment or court proceedings, appropriately authorised external counsel is required. This agency does not take that on.

  7. 07

    Status updated

    The outcome is carried as its own state. Content being restored does not erase the earlier removal from the record.

Correspondence between this agency and the recipient is not evidence of initiated legal action. Where such evidence is required, appropriately authorised external counsel is needed.

Deadlines

Four deadline types that have nothing to do with one another. They are tracked separately because different parties set them and missing one has different consequences from missing another.

  • Recipient query

    Set by the recipient
    PLATFORM_ADDITIONAL_INFO

    Counted in: the recipient’s calendar

    The recipient has asked for more information. The period comes from its own procedure and is recorded together with the wording of the query.

  • Post-counter-notification period

    Set by the recipient
    LEGAL_ACTION_RESPONSE

    Counted in: the recipient’s calendar

    After a counter-notification, recipients regularly allow the notifier a period in which evidence of initiated legal action may be produced. Correspondence from this agency to the recipient is not such evidence.

  • Authorization expiry

    From the authorization
    AUTHORIZATION_EXPIRY

    Counted in: calendar days

    Comes from the validity period of the authorization itself. Once it passes, nothing new is filed for that client.

  • Client response

    Internal follow-up
    CLIENT_RESPONSE

    Counted in: German business days

    An internal follow-up while a matter waits on information or evidence from the client. Movable — it is our own deadline. Reminder after three business days, administrative closure no earlier than seven — and only where no external deadline is running.

  • Counter-notification handling period

    Set by the recipient
    COUNTER_NOTIFICATION

    Counted in: the recipient’s calendar

    The period the recipient states for handling a counter-notification it has received. Tracked separately from the period for evidencing legal action.

  • Correction or retraction review

    Internal follow-up
    RETRACTION_RESPONSE

    Counted in: German business days

    From the moment a point is raised. The matter is paused meanwhile — see /correction-and-retraction.

  • Internal review

    Internal follow-up
    INTERNAL_REVIEW

    Counted in: German business days

    The observation window before closure, follow-ups on repeat infringement, and the annual authorization re-attestation.

Fields of a deadline record

  • deadlineTypeDeadline type
  • sourceSet by
  • triggeredAtTriggering event
  • dueAtDue at
  • timezoneTime zone
  • businessDayRuleBusiness-day rule
  • businessDayCalendarCalendar used
  • notesWording of the deadline as set
  • statusStatus
  • completedAtCompleted at

Deadline states

  • OpenOPEN
  • Due soonDUE_SOON
  • MetMET
  • MissedMISSED
  • No longer applicableCANCELLED

This page deliberately states no number of days. The applicable period comes from the procedure of the particular recipient and is recorded per case exactly as that recipient states it.

Have a case assessed under this methodology

The initial assessment follows the same steps — it just stops before submission.

Have your case assessedOur principles