Today, justice was served. And the world of content theft has been officially put on notice — again.

⚖️ The court’s ruling (Case No. 5008056-90.2024.8.21.0015) leaves no doubt:

⚖️ “A utilização de obra protegida sem a devida autorização [...] constitui, por si só, violação ao direito de propriedade intelectual, independentemente da finalidade (comercial ou não).”
🟥 “The use of a protected work without proper authorization constitutes, by itself, a violation of intellectual property rights, regardless of whether the purpose is commercial or not.”

🧮 Damages & Cease Order:

The judge ordered the defendant to pay US$ 21,420 in material damages (based on the verified entry-level rate of US$ 90 per second) and R$ 10,000 in moral damages, plus 1% monthly interest and IGP-M correction. She is also prohibited from using or reposting any part of Wawak's footage, under a daily fine of R$ 1,000.

⚖️ 100% Victory — Brazilian Court Recognizes One Man Wolf Pack’s Copyright and Valuation Principles

The 3rd Civil Court of Gravataí (Rio Grande do Sul) has ruled fully in favor of Miroslaw Tadeusz Wawak, confirming that Carolina Pintos de Britto unlawfully used nearly four minutes of his aerial footage.

Her entire defense — claiming the material was used only for a university assignment and without monetization — collapsed. The Court reaffirmed that unauthorized use alone constitutes copyright infringement, even without financial gain.

⛓️‍💥 Material Damages:

Beyond financial harm, the Court recognized the violation of moral rights under Article 24 II LDA. Carolina not only used the video without authorization but also removed the author’s identifying sequences, depriving him of credit:

⚖️ “Considerando que a ré utilizou 238 segundos da obra [...] e adotando-se o valor mínimo de US$ 90,00 por segundo, o montante indenizatório resulta em US$ 21.420,00.”
🟥 “Considering that the defendant used 238 seconds of the work [...] and adopting the minimum rate of US$ 90 per second, the indemnification amount is US$ 21,420.00.”

In this case, the calculation was deliberately conservative, limited to the edited footage duration instead of the full RAW-second equivalence usually applied in professional licensing for broadcasters or global media clients.

This approach reflects proportionality, acknowledging the defendant’s freelance scale while reaffirming that damages must follow the author’s verified licensing values — not arbitrary market comparisons:

⚖️ “Unlike the claims of some infringers who insist that ‘we usually pay $100 for a Pond5 clip, so we won’t pay more,’ the judgment confirms that copyright valuation depends on the author’s professional rate, not on irrelevant stock marketplace benchmarks.”

🧭 Moral Damages:

The decision adopted the verified entry-level professional rate of US$ 90 per second for the copied portion used, totaling US$ 21,420 (≈ R$ 115,000 + interest and monetary correction)-

⚖️ “A ré não apenas utilizou a obra sem autorização, como também suprimiu os créditos de autoria ao remover as vinhetas do vídeo original.”
🟥 “The defendant not only used the work without authorization but also suppressed the author’s credits by removing the original intro and ending sequences.”

For this, the judge ordered payment of R$ 10,000 in moral damages, plus interest and IGP-M correction — confirming that the erasure of authorship is a compensable offense in itself.

📜 The Collapse of the “Article 104” Defense

Carolina’s attempt to shield herself behind Article 104 LDA — which concerns commercial counterfeiting and resale for profit — was rejected outright:

⚖️ “A defesa fundamentada no artigo 104 da LDA não prospera.”
🟥 “The defense based on Article 104 of the Copyright Law does not succeed.”

⚖️ The Court clarified that Articles 28 and 29 grant the author exclusive control over reproduction and display, regardless of whether the infringer profited. Her “no monetization” argument therefore carried no legal weight.

🔒 Automatic Protection, Strengthened by U.S. Registration

⚖️ The judgment acknowledged that copyright protection arises automatically upon creation, even without any specific registration. Yet it also noted that Wawak’s U.S. Copyright Office registration (PA 2-361-746) for several of his works further reinforces authorship and international enforceability.

🧭 Precedent Value

This ruling establishes a vital precedent in Brazil:

🟥 Author-defined valuation: Courts must base compensation on the creator’s professional licensing history, not on random “market averages.”
🟥 Evidence standards: ISO 27037-compliant Verifact reports are valid technical proof of infringement.
🟥 Universal liability: Educational intent or lack of monetization does not excuse unauthorized use.

It also marks a Brazilian judgment referencing an international copyright registration and quantifying drone-footage damages in U.S. dollars.

⚖️ The message is clear: whether infringement occurs in a global newsroom or on a local YouTube channel, creative property retains full legal value.

📣 Our Statement

Our lawsuit and the court's ruling sets a clear message: our work is protected everywhere — whether it’s used by a multinational broadcaster or a local YouTube channel. Creativity has value, and that value was now officially recognized in Brazil.

⚖️ This isn't just our victory. It’s a warning to the next copyright thief. We document. We strike. We win. ⚖️

(Public-domain excerpts from Sentença 03/11/2025, Process No. 5008056-90.2024.8.21.0015 — Tribunal de Justiça do Rio Grande do Sul.)

👉 Summary of the Article

A Brazilian court has officially ruled that Carolina Pintos de Britto, operator of the YouTube channel Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores, committed copyright infringement by illegally using 3 minutes and 58 seconds of One Man Wolf Pack’s copyrighted drone footage without any authorization or license. The judgment from the 3rd Civil Court of Gravataí (Rio Grande do Sul) rejected her defense that the video was merely an academic exercise and confirmed that unauthorized use alone constitutes a violation of intellectual property rights, regardless of any commercial intent.

Backed by Verifact ISO 27037 digital-evidence certification and proof of U.S. Copyright Office registration, the court ordered Carolina Pintos de Britto to pay US$ 21,420.00 in material damages plus R$ 10,000.00 in moral damages, applying the verified entry-level licensing rate of US$ 90 per second. The ruling establishes the Brazilian precedent recognizing professional drone-footage valuation in U.S. dollars and confirming that even small-scale content creators are fully liable for unauthorized use of protected works.

This victory reinforces the global message that creativity has measurable value — and “no monetization” is no defense.

#RealJustice #RealTruth #RealTransparency #OneManWolfPack #ContentCreators

Keywords: carolina pintos de britto, gravataí copyright ruling, brazilian court drone footage, copyright infringement brazil, rio grande do sul court decision, copyright law brazil, verifact iso 27037 evidence, us copyright office registration, drone video lawsuit brazil, youtube copyright infringement brazil, unauthorized use video brazil, copyright damages calculation, moral damages brazil, intellectual property law brazil, article 104 lda, copyright precedent brazil, one man wolf pack court ruling, us 90 per second rate, drone licensing standards, content theft brazil, brazil copyright judgment 2025, digital evidence brazil, gravataí civil court decision, international copyright protection, youtube drone footage misuse brazil, miroslaw wawak copyright case

Resumo em Português

Um tribunal brasileiro decidiu oficialmente que Carolina Pintos de Britto, operadora do canal do YouTube Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores, cometeu violação de direitos autorais ao utilizar 3 minutos e 58 segundos de filmagens aéreas da One Man Wolf Pack sem qualquer autorização ou licença. A sentença da 3ª Vara Cível de Gravataí (Rio Grande do Sul) rejeitou a defesa de que o vídeo era apenas um trabalho acadêmico e confirmou que o uso não autorizado por si só constitui violação de direitos de propriedade intelectual, independentemente de haver finalidade comercial.

Com base em prova digital certificada pela Verifact (ISO 27037) e no registro do Copyright Office dos EUA, o tribunal condenou Carolina Pintos de Britto a pagar US$ 21.420,00 em danos materiais e R$ 10.000,00 em danos morais, aplicando a taxa profissional mínima de US$ 90 por segundo. A decisão cria o precedente brasileiro que reconhece a valoração profissional de filmagens de drone em dólares norte-americanos e confirma que até criadores de pequeno porte são totalmente responsáveis por usos não autorizados.

Esta vitória reforça a mensagem global de que a criatividade tem valor mensurável — e “sem monetização” não é defesa.

Palavras-chave: carolina pintos de britto, decisão judicial gravataí, violação de direitos autorais brasil, filmagem com drone, tribunal rio grande do sul, direito autoral brasileiro, verifact iso 27037, registro copyright office eua, danos morais brasil, artigo 104 lda, precedente de direitos autorais brasil, um homem lobo solitário decisão judicial, us 90 por segundo, valoração de filmagens com drone, proteção internacional de direitos autorais, uso indevido de vídeo no youtube brasil, caso miroslaw wawak

Zusammenfassung auf Deutsch

Ein brasilianisches Gericht hat entschieden, dass Carolina Pintos de Britto, Betreiberin des YouTube-Kanals Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores, Urheberrechtsverletzung beging, indem sie 3 Minuten und 58 Sekunden von One Man Wolf Packs Drohnenaufnahmen ohne Genehmigung oder Lizenz verwendete. Das Urteil des 3. Zivilgerichts von Gravataí (Rio Grande do Sul) wies ihre Behauptung zurück, es handle sich lediglich um eine Studienarbeit, und bestätigte, dass bereits die unautorisierte Nutzung eine Urheberrechtsverletzung darstellt, unabhängig von kommerziellem Zweck.

Gestützt auf Verifact-Beweissicherung nach ISO 27037 und ein US Copyright Office-Register verurteilte das Gericht Carolina Pintos de Britto zu 21.420 US-Dollar Schadensersatz sowie 10.000 R$ immateriellen Schaden, berechnet auf Basis eines professionellen Einstiegs-Lizenzwerts von 90 US-Dollar pro Sekunde. Das Urteil gilt als brasilianisches Präzedenzbeispiel, das die professionelle Bewertung von Drohnenaufnahmen in US-Dollar anerkennt und feststellt, dass auch kleine Content-Creator voll haftbar sind.

Dieses Urteil sendet eine klare Botschaft: Kreativität hat messbaren Wert – und “keine Monetarisierung” ist keine Verteidigung.

Schlüsselwörter: carolina pintos de britto, urteil gravataí, urheberrechtsverletzung brasilien, drohnenvideo urheberrecht, verifact iso 27037, copyright office usa, immaterieller schaden brasilien, artikel 104 lda, urheberrechtspräzedenzfall brasilien, one man wolf pack urteil, 90 usd pro sekunde, drohnenlizenzierung, internationale urheberrechtsdurchsetzung, youtube urheberrechtsverletzung brasilien, miroslaw wawak fall

Resumen en Español

Un tribunal brasileño dictaminó oficialmente que Carolina Pintos de Britto, operadora del canal de YouTube Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores, cometió infracción de derechos de autor al utilizar 3 minutos y 58 segundos de metraje aéreo de One Man Wolf Pack sin licencia ni autorización. El fallo del Tercer Juzgado Civil de Gravataí (Río Grande del Sur) rechazó su defensa de que se trataba de un trabajo académico y confirmó que el uso no autorizado por sí solo constituye una violación de los derechos de propiedad intelectual, independientemente de su finalidad comercial.

Con pruebas digitales certificadas por Verifact (ISO 27037) y el registro del Copyright Office de EE. UU., el tribunal ordenó a Carolina Pintos de Britto pagar 21.420 USD en daños materiales y 10.000 BRL en daños morales, aplicando la tarifa profesional mínima de 90 USD por segundo. La sentencia sienta el precedente brasileño que reconoce la valoración profesional de videos de drones en dólares estadounidenses y confirma que incluso los pequeños creadores son plenamente responsables por el uso no autorizado de obras protegidas.

Esta victoria refuerza el mensaje mundial de que la creatividad tiene un valor medible — y “sin monetización” no es defensa.

Palabras clave: carolina pintos de britto, fallo gravataí, infracción de derechos de autor brasil, dron video derechos, verifact iso 27037, copyright office eeuu, daños morales brasil, artículo 104 lda, precedente de copyright brasil, one man wolf pack caso, 90 usd por segundo, licencia de video dron, protección internacional de derechos de autor, uso no autorizado youtube brasil, caso miroslaw wawak

Résumé en français

Un tribunal brésilien a officiellement jugé que Carolina Pintos de Britto, opératrice de la chaîne YouTube Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores, a commis une violation du droit d’auteur en utilisant 3 minutes et 58 secondes des images aériennes de One Man Wolf Pack sans aucune autorisation ni licence. Le jugement du 3ᵉ tribunal civil de Gravataí (Rio Grande do Sul) a rejeté sa défense selon laquelle la vidéo n’était qu’un travail académique, confirmant que l’utilisation non autorisée constitue à elle seule une infraction au droit de la propriété intellectuelle, indépendamment de toute intention commerciale.

Sur la base d’une preuve numérique certifiée Verifact (ISO 27037) et d’un enregistrement du Copyright Office américain, le tribunal a condamné Carolina Pintos de Britto à verser 21 420 $ US de dommages matériels et 10 000 R$ de dommages moraux, en appliquant le tarif professionnel minimal de 90 $ US par seconde. Ce jugement établit le précédent au Brésil reconnaissant la valorisation professionnelle des séquences de drone en dollars US et confirme que même les petits créateurs de contenu sont pleinement responsables en cas d’usage non autorisé.

Cette victoire envoie un message clair : la créativité a une valeur mesurable — et “pas de monétisation” n’est pas une défense.

Mots-clés: carolina pintos de britto, jugement gravataí, violation du droit dauteur brésil, drone vidéo copyright, verifact iso 27037, copyright office usa, dommages moraux brésil, article 104 lda, précédent juridique brésilien, one man wolf pack affaire, 90 usd par seconde, évaluation de vidéos de drone, protection internationale du droit dauteur, utilisation non autorisée youtube brésil, affaire miroslaw wawak

文章摘要 (繁體中文 / 粵語)

巴西法院正式裁定 Carolina Pintos de Britto（YouTube 頻道 Carolina Britto Designer de Interiores 擁有人）侵犯版權，非法使用 3 分 58 秒 的 One Man Wolf Pack 無人機航拍影片，未獲任何授權或許可。 Gravataí 第三民事法院 駁回其「學術用途」辯解，確認 未經授權的使用本身即屬侵犯知識產權，無論是否牟利。

憑藉 Verifact ISO 27037 認證電子證據 及 美國版權局註冊，法院判令她支付 美金 21,420 元損害賠償 及 巴幣 10,000 元精神損害，按每秒 美金 90 元 的專業入門授權費計算。 此案成為 巴西首個 以美元計算航拍影片價值的法律先例，並確認即使是小型創作者，亦須為未經授權的使用承擔全部法律責任。

這次勝利再次證明：創意有其價值，「未變現」並非藉口。

關鍵詞: Carolina Pintos de Britto、巴西版權判決、Gravataí 法院、無人機影片版權、ISO 27037 電子證據、美國版權局註冊、巴西精神損害賠償、LDA 第 104 條、巴西版權先例、One Man Wolf Pack 案件、每秒 90 美元、航拍影片估值、國際版權保護、YouTube 未授權影片、Miroslaw Wawak 案件

About the Author

Miroslaw Wawak is a world-traveling filmmaker, drone pilot, and founder of One Man Wolf Pack — also internationally known from the Netflix production “Crime Scene Berlin: Nightlife Killer” (↗️IMDb), where his story was featured as a survivor and main protagonist. Having explored and documented 222 countries, his original and unqiue aerial footage has been featured in international media, Hollywood trailers, and major global events.

Beyond his creative work, Miroslaw is a passionate advocate for creator rights, transparency, and social impact—regularly supporting community projects and defending his original work against unauthorized use worldwide. He’s taken legal action against everyone from international broadcasters (e.g. ESPN, TyC Sports) and tech giants (e.g. Facebook, YouTube) to national icons (e.g. Deutsche Welle, Globo, BAND/Radio Bandeirantes)—even religious institutions—when they violated his copyright.

Through exposing countless violations of his copyright and collaborating with top intellectual property attorneys around the globe—including landmark legal battles from Europe to the Americas and as far as Bermuda—Miroslaw Wawak has acquired an unmatched expertise in defending his rights and bringing every discovered infringement to justice.

🟥 His most recent victory in a ↗️precedent-setting case against the BAND network in Brazil proved not only the financial strength but also the strategic determination and domination behind his enforcement efforts.

↑ Back to Top