We Disassociate Ourselves From Unauthorized Use of Our Footage in State Media Broadcasts and Propaganda »

ℹ️ Read also: Reuters Under Fire for Distributing Chinese Military Propaganda with Copyrighted Drone Footage »

---

🚨 Update: Pressure Rising — Global Media Request Reuters to Resolve the Matter »

17/04/2025 | While our legal team continues to work around the clock to enforce the removal of all unauthorized uses of our copyright-protected Taipei footage — which was embedded into a hostile propaganda video and syndicated globally without any license or permission by Reuters and CCTV+ — we remain committed to full transparency throughout this process.

As we are currently receiving numerous inquiries from international media outlets asking whether Reuters has responded to us any further, we want to clarify that — since our detailed legal reply sent on the evening of April 14, 2025 — Reuters has not provided any formal answer. The only message received in this line of communication was a brief note the following morning, stating that they "need to investigate further."

This delay is particularly concerning, given that several of Reuters' licensees have experienced copyright enforcement consequences across major platforms, including YouTube. Many have now confirmed to us directly that Reuters was the source of the infringing material.

In the spirit of transparency, we are now publishing our full message to Reuters for public record:

TO: ■■■■■■■■■■, Head of Rights Management
Reuters
5 Canada Square
Canary Wharf
London E14 5AQ
United Kingdom

RE: Use of copyrighted drone footage

Date: April 14, 2025

Dear Mr. ■■■■■■■■■■,

Thank you for your message and for acknowledging Reuters’ role in the unauthorized distribution of our copyrighted drone footage.

We have received your confirmation that the video in question has now been removed from your systems and that a communication was sent to Reuters customers advising them to cease further usage. While we note this action, the scale of damage already caused by this infringement requires a comprehensive legal and financial resolution.

Scope and Magnitude of the Infringement

The content you distributed included aerial footage registered with the U.S. Copyright Office (Reg. No. PA 2-361-746), originally published under our brand, One Man Wolf Pack. This footage was created independently in Taiwan — a location of deep personal significance to me as both a filmmaker and a former student at National Taipei University of Technology (NTUT) — and was used without any form of license or authorization.

It was subsequently embedded in a Chinese military propaganda video and redistributed via Reuters' global syndication network to some of the largest news outlets in the world. The emotional and reputational harm caused by this misuse — especially given the footage's placement in a narrative involving cross-strait tensions and military threat posturing — is severe and ongoing.

Written Communication Only

Given the massive scale of this violation, touching multiple countries, media networks, and legal jurisdictions, we insist that all further communication be conducted in writing. The complexity and legal sensitivity of the matter require a clear and documented paper trail. We do not accept phone calls or verbal settlement discussions for issues of this magnitude.

Damages Being Considered

We are currently assessing damages on multiple legal and factual bases, including but not limited to:

• Statutory damages under U.S. copyright law (17 U.S. Code §504),
• Emotional and reputational harm, especially in connection with the inappropriate political messaging,
• Lost licensing revenue,
• Legal and investigative costs,
• And the ongoing effort required to pursue takedown actions worldwide, due to the initial distribution made through Reuters.

We will provide a detailed damage estimate once our legal teams have finalized their audit. That said, we expect any settlement proposal from Reuters to reflect the seriousness of this infringement.

On Your Request to Withdraw Copyright Strikes

Regarding your request to retract any existing copyright strikes:
We must respectfully decline. These takedowns were lawfully issued, and they remain active and justified. Once a comprehensive settlement is reached, including full compensation for all damages incurred, we may revisit the matter.

Until then, our legal teams will continue to track each individual reproduction of this video. Any version still available — whether hosted by a Reuters client, a downstream media outlet, or even an independent content re-uploader — will be pursued for takedown. Our evidence collection is conducted and secured under ISO 27037 standards, ensuring all captured material holds full legal value in court.

We are deeply committed to ensuring that our footage — especially when misused in a politically charged context — is no longer available anywhere on the internet or any affiliated platform. Under no circumstances do we accept our work being attached to narratives of this nature, whether distributed via Reuters or — to borrow a metaphor — by a rice farmer in Guangzhou.

Next Steps

We await your written proposal to resolve this matter. Given the breadth of your syndication network and the trust many media outlets place in Reuters' due diligence, we are sure you understand the urgency and seriousness of this situation.

Attached, please find today’s communication from DER SPIEGEL, represented by We Are Era, who have formally acknowledged our ownership of the footage in question and expressed regret over its unauthorized distribution. We appreciate the transparency shown in this correspondence, and trust that Reuters will maintain the same standard of honesty and cooperation throughout this process. In light of such clear confirmations by your partners, we believe continued references to “alleged” infringement would not only be inaccurate but may also hinder the spirit of resolution.

Sincerely,

Miroslaw Wawak
One Man Wolf Pack

As this case progresses, everyone involved — or simply watching from the sidelines — can expect regular updates here. The truth deserves daylight.

[ANOTHER UPDATE AS OF 17/04/2025] Another Curveball from Reuters?

In what seems like yet another attempt to avoid addressing the matter in writing, we were approached by Reuters' Global Head of Output, Video News, claiming that his own drone material had also been used without permission — and that he, too, was seeking clarification from Reuters. This individual, however, suggested a phone call instead of providing any specific information or written context.

While we welcome anyone standing up for their intellectual property rights, we find the timing and delivery of this interaction… peculiar, to say the least. Especially considering that Reuters — a global news organization whose core values allegedly include justice, truth and transparency — continues to avoid issuing formal, written statements regarding the licensing chain of the content at issue.

Our position remains: we do not engage in unscheduled phone calls regarding serious legal matters involving multiple jurisdictions, syndicated distribution, and millions of dollars in potential damages. All communication must remain on record.

As such, and again in the interest of maintaining full transparency, we are now publishing our written response to this “casual phone call request” in full below:

TO: ■■■■■■■■■■, Global Head of Output, Video News
Reuters
5 Canada Square
Canary Wharf
London E14 5AQ
United Kingdom

RE: Taiwan drone footage

Date: April 17, 2025

Dear Mr. ■■■■■■■■■■,

Thank you for your message.

We’re sorry to hear that your own drone footage has been misused in the past — as fellow creators, we understand how deeply frustrating such violations can be. However, we’re somewhat unclear about the intent of your outreach. Are you offering advice on how to handle infringements of intellectual property rights? If so, we can assure you: there is no need for that, thank you.

Over the past decade, we’ve witnessed a disturbing rise in what we call the “self-service mentality” across the media industry — where even the world’s most respected news networks include cinematic aerial visuals into their programming without ever having sought a license, credit, or permission.

That’s why:

• We have partnered with some of the most experienced intellectual property attorneys worldwide — including regional teams extending as far as the island of Bermuda — to protect our work globally.


• We have officially registered our most widely distributed and most frequently infringed drone works with the U.S. Copyright Office, including the Taipei footage at the center of the current dispute.


• We systematically preserve all digital evidence in court-compliant formats (ISO 27037), and pursue takedowns and legal action even for a few seconds of misuse, including multiple lawsuits already filed around the world — also in countries considered difficult enforcement environments, such as India and Argentina (TyC Sports, ESPN and others).


• We do not differentiate in the enforcement of our rights: whether it’s a small digital publisher or a multi-billion-dollar media conglomerate who believed they could publish and even resell our work — we act with full legal force to defend our creative labor and the immense production costs behind it.


• By standing up against this form of injustice — where global media giants enrich their narratives using visuals captured through the personal sacrifice, sweat, and passion of independent creators — we are fighting for every filmmaker, artist, and storyteller who has ever been exploited. For those whose art was copied, buried, or dismissed without credit or compensation. This isn’t just about our footage — it’s about all creators who dared to build something unique, only to see it taken by those who think they’re untouchable.


• Especially when such unlawfully copied works end up being misused in state-controlled propaganda — embedded in threatening messages targeting places, countries, and people that a creator like me holds close to his heart. The emotional toll of seeing one’s art weaponized for narratives of intimidation is impossible to quantify, but we will continue to seek accountability through every legal and ethical channel available.


• Lastly, by fiercely defending our rights against any form of unauthorized use, we are also standing up for the partners who chose the right path — those who value creativity, honor fair licensing, and respect the work it takes to capture these unique moments. They deserve to compete on fair terms, not in a world where stolen content becomes the shortcut to profit.

While we understand your message was sent independently, we must also point out that Reuters as an organization has, so far, failed to make any concrete offer of resolution, despite being the very source through which multiple infringers like Canal 26, The Sun and many more have distributed and monetized our work without any license or permission.

In fact, Reuters clients began filing fraudulent counter-notifications against our rightful claims as early as April 8, 2025, in attempts to reinstate unauthorized content — believing, it seems, that Reuters had supplied them with valid rights. This has triggered costly legal follow-ups and intensified the urgency of this situation.

For this reason, and in the interest of maintaining a streamlined and focused communication structure, we kindly ask you to refer all matters to Mr. ■■■■■■■■■■, with whom our legal and copyright enforcement teams are already in direct contact.

While your personal empathy is noted, we are not seeking informal conversations or anecdotal insights — our priority remains the full legal enforcement of our rights and a structured resolution of this matter. Until then, our legal team continues to work around the clock to identify, verify, and remove any remaining unauthorized use of our copyright-protected Taipei drone footage, across every platform where it appears.

Until this matter is fully resolved through appropriate legal and financial channels, we respectfully insist that all communication remain strictly formal and in writing between designated representatives. Given the global scale of the unauthorized syndication, the reputational and financial harm caused, and the considerable legal efforts now underway to enforce and protect our rights, fragmented or informal communication would only serve to obstruct meaningful progress.

Moreover, due to the public nature of the infringement and the widespread distribution of our copyrighted content via your platform and syndication partners, we explicitly reserve the right to publicly comment on the situation at any time, including through press, legal publications, and digital platforms. That includes sharing factual updates regarding the timeline, parties involved, and the actions taken — or not taken — to resolve the matter.

Sincerely,

Miroslaw Wawak
One Man Wolf Pack

This story is still being written. Until accountability is met with action, this platform will continue to document the facts — for justice, truth, transparency, and every independent creator whose rights were stolen in silence.

How Our Footage Was Misused »

09/04/2025 | Following an extensive investigation, we discovered that our original drone footage from Taipei, Taiwan was included—without any form of license or attribution—in a video report distributed by CCTV News Content (CCTV+), a Beijing-based state media agency. This production was then syndicated to news outlets around the world through Reuters, one of the largest and most influential news agencies.

As a result, our footage has been reproduced in news stories involving cross-strait tensions between China and Taiwan, particularly during coverage of military drills and political messaging.

This article is being updated on an ongoing basis.

Index | Table of Contents »

---

»Deep Personal Distress — A Connection to Taiwan
»Media Outlets That Used the Footage Without Our Permission
»Broader Context: What This Video Represents
»Expanded Context: The Broader Propaganda Narrative and Symbolism
»What Has CCTV+ Done?
»The Chain of Accountability for This Infringement
»What Went Wrong at Reuters (»UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025)
»The Role of YouTube, Facebook, Instagram and X (Twitter) in Delaying Justice (»UPDATE AS OF 13/04/2025)
»Our Legal Response
»Public Statement of Disassociation
»Final Thoughts
»Fraudulent Counter Notifications Must Not Be Tolerated
»UPDATE AS OF 10/04/2025
»UPDATE AS OF 10/04/2025 — PART II: Further Communication from CCTV+ Reveals Alarming Strategy
»UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025 — CCTV Pleads for Strike Withdrawal — After Publishing Unlicensed Footage
»UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025 — Repeat Counter-Notification Abuse by NW18 Media Group

»UPDATE AS OF 17/04/2025 — Pressure Rising — Global Media Request Reuters to Resolve the Matter
»ANOTHER UPDATE AS OF 17/04/2025 — Another Curveball from Reuters?
»UPDATE AS OF 19/04/2025 — What About CCTV? Vanished Behind the Great Wall of Silence

»Original sequence by One Man Wolf Pack VS. unlawful reproductions
»My Connection to Taiwan — Pictures

Deep Personal Distress — A Connection to Taiwan   ↑

As someone who personally studied in Taiwan, at the National Taipei University of Technology (NTUT / "Taipei Tech"), I was devastated to see my artistic footage—created out of admiration for the Taiwanese people and their vibrant, democratic culture—used in a political narrative I do not support.

Taiwan holds a very special place in my heart. I spent meaningful time there, not just as a traveler or filmmaker, but as a student, a guest, and a part of its open, warm, and freedom-loving society. My experience in Taiwan has shaped the way I see the world and the values I hold close as a creative professional.

To see my drone footage—filmed with passion, joy, and respect—suddenly placed in the middle of a geopolitical message being broadcast from one side of a conflict to another has been deeply distressing and personally upsetting.

My aerial footage of Taiwan — particularly the cinematic drone film “【4K】🇹🇼 Drone Footage 🔥 Falling in love with TAIWAN 🔥 Ilha Formosa 🔥🔥🔥 Cinematic Aerial Film 🔥 台湾” — has been widely praised across the internet for its breathtaking composition, authentic atmosphere, and heartfelt tribute to Taiwan’s unique urban beauty. With over 60,000 views on YouTube and enthusiastic reactions from viewers around the world, it has even caught the attention of major regional news outlets.

In an article titled 「老外看台灣」德國型男耗時八個月空拍絕美台灣 網友：直接當觀光局廣告 (»Yahoo News Taiwan), one commenter said the video “looks like a tourism bureau commercial,” while others praised the “pure sincerity” and “mesmerizing editing” that radiates love for Taiwan.

Another article on LINE TODAY Taiwan (»Link) similarly highlighted the emotional and artistic power of the footage, calling it an “8-month dedication to filming the beauty of Taiwan,” and describing the filmmaker as a “handsome foreigner” who showed Taiwan “in the most beautiful light.”

Media Outlets That Used the Footage Without Our Permission   ↑

After tracing the chain of distribution, we discovered that, amongst others, the following international media outlets published or rebroadcast our footage, all without seeking permission or verifying its original copyright:

• WION (India),
• DER SPIEGEL (Germany),
• FRANCE 24 (France – in multiple language editions),
• Al Jazeera (Qatar),
• CNN-News18 (India),
• The Sun (United Kingdom),
• The Economic Times (India),
• CRUX (India / Global),
• CNA (Singapore),
• Canal 26 (Argentina),
• moneycontrol (India),
• CCTV中文 (China),
• BBC News 中文 (United Kingdom/China),
• news.com.au (Australia),
• The Australian (Australia),
• 天天看一廈 (China),
• 通視 (Hong Kong),
• 中国新闻社 (China),
• 华人风采CN (China) etc.

In some of these broadcasts, headlines included language such as “China surrounds Taiwan with warships & fighter jets” or “Mainland never tolerates Taiwan secessionist activities”—framing my visual material within a message I never authorized and strongly disassociate myself from.

Broader Context: What This Video Represents   ↑

As confirmed in a recent editorial by Taipei Times (April 5, 2025), the video in which my footage was reproduced is not merely “news footage,” but part of a wider Chinese state propaganda campaign designed to simulate a military attack on Taiwan. This same video — titled “Subdue Demons and Vanquish Evils” (Chinese: 降妖除魔) — includes scenes such as missile launches, joystick-controlled drone simulations, zoom-ins on Taiwan’s map, and even my drone shot flying directly toward Taipei 101.

The Taipei Times writes:

"It also published a series of propaganda videos on Weibo, with one titled ‘Subdue Demons and Vanquish Evils,’ which simulated missile attacks on Taiwan and featured scenes of Taipei 101."
— Taipei Times Editorial, April 5, 2025
Source: Taipei Times Editorial

The editorial, authored by Taiwan’s Head Prosecutor at the Taichung High Prosecutors’ Office, makes clear that the production is part of a legally defined “hostile” military messaging campaign. The use of my creative work within this visual narrative — orchestrated by a foreign state and then syndicated globally — deepens the emotional harm and legal gravity of this case.

🔶 Expanded Context: The Broader Propaganda Narrative and Symbolism   ↑

To fully understand the gravity of this incident, it's important to place the unauthorized use of my drone footage within the broader narrative pushed by Chinese state media and the People's Liberation Army (PLA). As outlined in an in-depth analysis by Domino Theory (source), the propaganda campaign surrounding the PLA’s latest military drills was anything but subtle.

The exercises, conducted by the Eastern Theater Command, were announced as a direct response to Taiwan's newly elected government. Their official objectives included “joint seizure of comprehensive superiority,” “assault on maritime and ground targets,” and “blockade on key areas and sea lanes.” The drills were symbolically titled "Subdue Demons and Vanquish Evils" — a phrase with deep-rooted cultural connotations — effectively casting Taiwan, and its leaders, as demonic entities.

In one striking visual described by Domino Theory, a PLA poster showed the Chinese character for advance (進逼) imposed directly over a silhouette of Taiwan, along with the phrase:

"Taiwan independence creates trouble, bringing fire upon itself."

This was not simply a military drill. It was a multi-platform, psychological pressure campaign — designed to intimidate Taiwan and to shape international perception through aggressive symbolism and media manipulation.

Against this backdrop, the inclusion of my drone footage — portraying Taipei 101 in a peaceful, cinematic flyover — takes on a completely different meaning. My visual, originally created to celebrate the skyline and energy of Taipei, was appropriated to imply a military targeting of the city’s as well as country's most iconic structure.

This isn’t just a question of copyright anymore. It’s a question of ethical responsibility. Distributing unlicensed creative work in service of foreign military messaging is a gross violation — one that further underscores the need for global media outlets and syndicators (like Reuters) to perform due diligence before amplifying such material.

What Has CCTV+ Done?   ↑

CCTV News Content (CCTV+), a subsidiary of Chinese state media, produced and distributed the original video containing our drone footage without any form of permission, license, or attribution. This footage was embedded in a propaganda-style broadcast presenting military operations against Taiwan, with our cinematic sequence flying toward Taipei 101 — one of Taiwan’s most iconic landmarks — used directly after a zoom-in map sequence and military joystick imagery, implying it as a target.

After a formal complaint and takedown request, CCTV+ admitted (see »UPDATE AS OF 10/04/2025) to having syndicated our footage to global media partners, including The Sun (UK), without ever obtaining rights to do so. Despite promising to cease use and revoke sublicenses, CCTV+ has not disclosed its full client list, and the infringing video remains live across multiple platforms as of now.

The Chain of Accountability for This Infringement   ↑

This case reveals a deeply troubling breakdown across multiple levels of global media syndication. The unauthorized use of our drone footage originated with CCTV News Content (CCTV+), a Chinese state-affiliated agency that embedded our creative work into a military propaganda piece and then distributed it to international clients without any license or permission.

From there, Reuters — a global media powerhouse — syndicated the content further, offering it to their own clients without verifying whether third-party footage had been properly cleared. This represents a serious lapse in due diligence and basic licensing protocol.

Finally, dozens of international news outlets, including FRANCE 24, The Sun, DER SPIEGEL, Al Jazeera, The Economic Times, and others, reproduced the footage without contacting us, falsely assuming legal clearance existed — some even filing fraudulent counter notifications although CCTV+ admitted they had no rights to the footage.

Every link in this chain failed. And every party who published or benefited from the use of our footage without a license is fully liable. We will continue to pursue justice at each level — from the original infringer, to the distributors, to the publishers.

Especially given the emotionally charged nature of the video campaign in which our footage was inserted, the responsibility of every participating party is elevated. Our drone sequence — originally created to highlight Taiwan’s cultural and architectural beauty — was included in a context that visually linked it to military aggression.

This same campaign also featured exaggerated or symbolic portrayals of Taiwan’s leadership, raising additional concerns about the editorial judgment involved in syndicating such material without verifying its components. We believe such content demands extra scrutiny, especially when being disseminated by international media outlets.

What Went Wrong at Reuters   ↑

At the center of this situation lies Reuters, which distributed the footage as part of its syndication network. It now appears that the video Reuters circulated may have been sourced from CCTV+ or PLA-affiliated sources, and contained third-party content that Reuters did not verify or have the rights to sublicense.

This appears to represent a serious case of copyright infringement, and may reflect a breakdown of ethical content verification by one of the world’s most powerful media organizations.

We have now seen multiple outlets confirm that their footage came from Reuters. However, Reuters never contacted us, nor were they ever granted rights to use or redistribute our work.

[UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025] Reuters Confirms Distribution of CCTV Propaganda Footage

After two weeks of unexplainable silence—while numerous international media clients had already contacted us directly over a week ago—Reuters has now officially responded. In the interest of transparency, we are publishing this important update.

Reuters has confirmed, in writing, that the video footage containing our U.S.-registered drone footage was supplied to them by the Chinese Military and CCTV. They state that the video in question has since been removed from their systems, and their clients were instructed to cease further use of the content.

However, despite this admittance, Reuters continues to refer to our footage was “allegedly” contained in the infringing production—this, despite never having contacted us prior to syndicating the material globally, and never having presented any proof of authorization or licensing. For an organization that claims to uphold the highest standards of journalism and rights management, this cautious wording and lack of accountability is deeply troubling.

We have declined their request to retract our copyright claims against their clients. The appearance of our footage in global propaganda-themed news coverage has caused significant emotional, reputational, and financial damage. Until a full and fair settlement is reached, our legal position remains unchanged.

Further updates will follow.

The Role of YouTube, Facebook, Instagram and X (Twitter) in Delaying Justice   ↑

While we have received encouraging responses from some publishers and takedowns are gradually being processed, the actions of major platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Instagram continue to present serious roadblocks to copyright enforcement. YouTube frequently delays or selectively processes takedown requests — especially when large media companies are involved — and has already accepted several fraudulent counter notifications, despite having been informed and presented with direct written proof of the infringement from the distributor (CCTV+).

Facebook and Instagram, on the other hand, have become notorious for ignoring DMCA takedown requests entirely — often failing to act even when overwhelming evidence is provided. Their Rights Manager tools are opaque, their support nonexistent, and their systems biased toward larger publishers.

It must be emphasized: under existing legal precedent — including Störerhaftung in Germany — platforms can be held legally accountable for knowingly continuing to host infringing content once notified. If these companies fail to fulfill their obligations, they may face serious legal consequences for undermining the enforcement of copyright and enabling the widespread dissemination of unlawfully reproduced material.

[UPDATE AS OF 13/04/2025] YouTube is now risking its own legal exposure

Despite receiving full copyright registration documentation, detailed legal explanations, and even written admissions from media outlets that they obtained the infringing content from unauthorized sources (namely CCTV+ and Reuters), YouTube has now processed repeat counter-notifications for the exact same infringing videos — including ones that were already ruled upon and rightfully rejected in previous reviews.

By doing so, YouTube is no longer simply a passive intermediary — it is actively facilitating the reinstatement of unlawful content that was removed based on valid copyright claims. These actions raise serious questions about whether YouTube is selectively enforcing its own DMCA policies depending on the size or commercial value of the channel involved.

We have observed a clear pattern: when copyright claims are filed against large or well-connected channels, YouTube delays action for days — if not weeks — under the guise of “additional review.” Meanwhile, takedowns against smaller, independent channels are processed immediately, often without a single follow-up question. This disparity shows that there are not equal rules for all creators on the platform, contradicting YouTube’s own public statements about fairness and neutrality.

By accepting repeat CNs that lack legal merit — and in some cases are nearly identical to ones already rejected — YouTube may be engaging in behavior that violates the DMCA process itself, especially under 17 U.S. Code §512(i) and §512(f). Should any of these reinstated videos go live again, YouTube may be considered to have willfully enabled copyright infringement, and legal action against the platform itself will be pursued accordingly.

🟥 Read our full message to YouTube (copyright@youtube.com) regarding this matter here »

The Economic Times: ‘We bought the stolen car fair and square!’ — Re-filing a rejected DMCA counter-notification like it’s a refund request. That’s not how copyright law works… and it might cost them under 17 U.S. Code §512(f).

Our Legal Response   ↑

To protect the integrity of our work and set the record straight, we have:

• Filed multiple DMCA takedown requests across YouTube and other platforms,
• Sent formal Cease & Desist letters to CCTV+, downstream publishers etc.,
• Preserved all evidence, screenshots, and license claims according to ISO 27037 digital evidences tandards,
• Initiated preparations for legal action where necessary.

While we remain open to resolving this situation professionally and amicably, we take our rights seriously—and will pursue every legal remedy available.

Public Statement of Disassociation   ↑

We publicly disassociate ourselves from any and all media content that uses our original work in connection with:

• Cross-strait political or military tensions,
• Chinese state messaging,
• PLA-related content or broadcasts,
• Any content implying political alignment or approval that we did not authorize.

Our work is created with the purpose of celebrating the beauty of places we visit—not to be repurposed in narratives that distort its meaning or mislead global audiences.

We deeply respect both the people of Taiwan and the values of peaceful cultural exchange. Our work is a reflection of those ideals—not of any military or political force.

Final Thoughts   ↑

We ask that all infringing parties take swift and appropriate action to remove our footage from their platforms and issue clarifications where necessary. To those still investigating the issue internally—we remain open to dialogue and resolution.

This situation has caused significant emotional and reputational distress. I take no pleasure in pursuing action against respected media organizations, but I owe it to the spirit in which my work was created—and to the people and places it was created to honor.

I am also sharing a few of my favorite personal photographs from Taiwan at the end of this post, alongside a screenshot of the exact aerial sequence that was unlawfully reproduced—so the truth, and the original intent of this work, is visible to everyone.

🟥 Fraudulent Counter Notifications Must Not Be Tolerated 🟥   ↑

Despite receiving written confirmation from CCTV+ that our copyrighted drone footage was used without permission and unlawfully syndicated, certain downstream publishers have filed counter notifications on YouTube in an attempt to reinstate infringing videos.

One such case is FRANCE 24, which submitted a counter notification claiming “Fair Use” for their unauthorized use of our footage — even though the distributor (CCTV+) has now admitted that the content was never properly licensed to begin with. This represents a textbook misuse of the DMCA process and an active attempt to undermine copyright protections. Below are redacted screenshots of the fraudulent counter notifications filed by FRANCE 24 and The Economic Times (India).

We share this as a public warning to all infringing parties: filing false or misleading counter notifications will only worsen your legal position. As confirmed by CCTV+ in writing, there is no valid license for any use of our footage — especially not within a foreign government’s military propaganda campaign.

Excerpt from a counter notification submitted by FRANCE 24 to YouTube, falsely claiming “fair use” of our footage — despite CCTV+’s written confirmation that no license or permission was ever granted. This misuse of the DMCA process is now part of our legal documentation.

This counter notification was submitted by the same FRANCE 24 manager who already filed a prior fraudulent counter notification on behalf of their French-language channel. Shockingly, this second filing — for the English-language version — was submitted without even responding to any of our earlier messages or attempting to resolve the matter in good faith. The channel falsely claims “Fair Use,” despite clear confirmation from CCTV+ that no license was ever granted. We are actively contesting this misuse of the DMCA system and will hold all parties fully accountable.

Redacted counter notification filed by The Economic Times, claiming their use of our footage was sourced via Reuters and “licensed” — a statement now directly contradicted by CCTV+’s admission of unauthorized distribution. This may constitute a fraudulent declaration under the DMCA, subject to legal consequences.

A well-known repeated and reckless infringer of our copyright, WION filed a counter notification claiming that their use of our footage was legitimate because it had been purchased from Reuters. However, CCTV+ — the original source — has already admitted in writing that no license was ever granted. This means Reuters had no right to sublicense our content, and WION’s claim is invalid. Notably, WION filed this counter notification without ever reaching out to us beforehand — a clear indication of bad faith. We are fighting this fraudulent counter-notification with full legal force.

---

UPDATE AS OF 10/04/2025   ↑

Following the publication of this article, the situation has significantly escalated. After presenting detailed evidence and multiple verified sightings of my drone footage in a propaganda video published by Chinese state media, CCTV News Content (CCTV+) has officially acknowledged that they distributed the unauthorized material.

In a written response, CCTV+ confirmed that my footage was included in their production and syndicated globally to third-party media clients — without ever having requested permission or securing a license. Among the recipients was The Sun, which CCTV+ explicitly identified as their client. The video in question was published on CCTV's official YouTube channel under the title “解放军舰机多向‘进逼’台岛 东部战区打出降妖除魔组合拳,” and forms part of a wider propaganda campaign against Taiwan.

Despite CCTV+ stating they would cease all use and revoke licenses, they have not disclosed their full list of clients or confirmed that the footage has been removed from all platforms.

This development further strengthens our position: the use of my protected work was not only unauthorized, but centrally coordinated and widely distributed under the banner of a foreign government’s military messaging. We continue to hold both CCTV+ and its sublicensees — including Reuters and downstream media outlets — fully accountable.

Legal action against several involved parties is now being prepared.

First message from a CCTV+ representative dated 10/04/2025, in which the organization formally admits to having distributed our copyrighted drone footage without any license or authorization. Personal details have been redacted for privacy.

UPDATE AS OF 10/04/2025 — PART II: Further Communication from CCTV+ Reveals Alarming Strategy   ↑

Shortly after admitting to the unauthorized use and distribution of our copyright-protected footage, CCTV+ reached out a second time — not to comply with our legal demands or disclose their list of sublicensees, but to request that we retract the copyright strike filed against their client, The Sun (UK).

In their own words, they stated:

"Could you please clear the strike against their YouTube video so that they may rectify it?"

In the same message, they attempted to pivot the conversation by requesting a copy of our business brochure and licensing rate card, suggesting an interest in "future cooperation." At this point, our content had not been removed from their official channels, nor had any sublicensing disclosures been provided — despite their earlier commitment to do so.

This sequence of communication raises serious concerns about the way CCTV+ is handling this situation:

• They have acknowledged infringement,
• Have yet to take full corrective action,
• Yet are attempting to suppress the legal record of that infringement by asking for takedown reversals.

🟥 TO BE CLEAR 🟥

We will not withdraw any valid copyright strikes until appropriate legal settlement is reached. Any sublicensing agreements CCTV+ made — whether with Reuters, The Sun, or other downstream media — remain legally void without prior authorization from us.

Furthermore, we now strongly advise CCTV+ and its representatives to refrain from requesting takedown retractions in any form, on behalf of their clients or themselves, until full compensation has been addressed. Doing so will be seen as an attempt to undermine legal process and will trigger direct legal action.

Below, we include redacted screenshots of the two emails received from CCTV+ for the sake of transparency. Personal details have been removed for privacy compliance.

This is not how legitimate news organizations resolve copyright violations — and this is not how artists should be treated.

Second message from the same CCTV+ representative, also dated 10/04/2025, requesting retraction of a copyright strike against one of their clients — despite still not having fulfilled our takedown demands. The message also includes an unexpected request for a business brochure and licensing rates. Personal details have been redacted for privacy.

At the time of writing, multiple takedown requests remain pending, and CCTV+ has not complied with our full list of demands.

UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025 — CCTV Pleads for Strike Withdrawal — After Publishing Unlicensed Footage   ↑

One of the most bizarre messages we received came directly from the official »Chinese-language YouTube channel of CCTV, sent from their copyright address. Written entirely in Mandarin — without any attempt to contact us in a language we actually speak — the message was a desperate plea to retract the copyright complaints filed against their uploads. Quoting directly:

"我方发布此类内容主要目的在于时政新闻对外宣传，无意侵犯贵方版权，对于引用贵方的版权内容，给贵方带来困扰，我们感到万分抱歉，也希望贵方可以考虑撤销strike，我们将第一时间配合，撤销后立刻删除视频。"

Translation:

"Our goal in publishing this type of content is solely to promote political news abroad. We had no intention of infringing your copyright. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused by our use of your copyrighted material and hope you will consider withdrawing the strike. Once withdrawn, we will immediately delete the video."

We found this response striking — not just for its lack of legal understanding, but for its assumption that these infringements could simply be undone by a quick apology and a request to “delete the video after the strike is gone.” All these individual uploads represent unauthorized reproductions of our U.S.-registered, copyright-protected footage, and each instance stands as a distinct violation under international copyright law.

While reviewing this same channel, our legal team — through painstaking manual investigation — also uncovered another instance of copyright infringement by CCTV dating back several years. This additional case involves a different work from our catalog, one which is likewise registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, and further strengthens the emerging picture: CCTV has engaged in a pattern of repeated copyright infringement across multiple years, targeting high-value content from independent creators.

CCTV’s only response: an apologetic message in Chinese, pleading for a strike removal — sent from a dubious e-mail address, without any official follow-up or legal contact.

UPDATE AS OF 14/04/2025 — Repeat Counter-Notification Abuse by NW18 Media Group   ↑

In a rather astonishing move, three additional counter-notifications were filed today by the Indian NW18 media group — specifically involving their channels moneycontrol, CRUX, and CNN-News18. All three counter-notices were signed by the same content manager, operating from the group’s headquarters in Mumbai. Each counter-notification repeats nearly identical language, attempting to justify their usage of our U.S.-registered footage through alleged sublicensing from Reuters. This tactic is not only baseless, as confirmed by Reuters’ own admission of having received the content from CCTV+ without proper clearance, but also potentially constitutes DMCA abuse.

Despite having already received clear legal notice through our Cease & Desist letters sent to them and verified copyright takedowns, NW18 continues to claim both “fair use” and “licensed use” — contradicting their own defense and disregarding the fact that no authorization exists for their use of our copyrighted material. Worse still, their demand for “prompt withdrawal of the infringement claim” shows either a profound misunderstanding of copyright law or a wilful attempt to undermine the DMCA process, which could lead to criminal liability under 17 U.S. Code §512(f).

The fact that these responses come after the videos were already removed due to verified copyright violations makes their persistence all the more troubling. Needless to say, we will not retract any claim, and we reserve all rights to pursue statutory damages, legal costs, and further action under U.S. jurisdiction, under which NW18 is now fully liable.

Three strikes, one hand — NW18 tries to undo global copyright violations with a copy-paste excuse.

UPDATE AS OF 19/04/2025 — What About CCTV? Vanished Behind the Great Wall of Silence   ↑

While the world's largest news outlets scramble to delete the infringing videos, retract statements, or beg for mercy, one of the very origins of this international legal wildfire — CCTV+ — has quietly disappeared behind what can only be described as the Great Wall of Silence (#TheGreatWallOfSilenceAndShame).

After admitting in writing that no license was ever acquired for our drone footage — and after confirming they would remove the material from their platforms and revoke all sublicenses — CCTV+ failed to act on their promises. As of today, multiple infringing videos are still live across their official YouTube properties and other CCTV-related websites. These include:

• Full-length propaganda video targeting Taiwan,
• Another video unlawfully reproducing another copyright-protected work of ours which is currently under investigation by YouTube's copyright department,
• A third infringing video containing copyright-protected work of one of our close fellow creators.

We’ve already filed successful takedowns, resulting in a total of four confirmed copyright strikes applied by YouTube against their official “CCTV中文” YouTube channel for violations of YouTube's terms of service. Therefore, the channel is now under restriction and in imminent risk of permanent termination. However, instead of correcting course, CCTV had been doubling down — and has filed two counter-notifications to challenge two of the four takedowns. Legally, this is a hazardous move, and we are fully prepared to file additional DMCA takedowns for the further copyright infringements by CCTV that our legal team has detected, reinstating their upload restrictions and documenting every step as further evidence of what appears to be willful infringement.

Let’s be clear: CCTV has been distributing footage that has now been confirmed to contain unlicensed material, monetizing it globally via platforms like YouTube, and licensing it to third parties without any rights to do so. They’ve transformed original creative work — in this case, a peaceful and artistic aerial tribute to Taiwan — into a weaponized visual within a state-run propaganda machine.

Despite multiple formal notices and multiple clear Cease & Desist letters, CCTV+ has not proposed a settlement, not followed through on deletion, nor provided any evidence of a single sublicense being retracted. Their actions may now constitute not only civil violations, but potentially criminal misuse of copyright-protected content for commercial and political gain.

The clock is ticking. And if this saga proves anything, it’s that silence is not protection — not under U.S. copyright law, not on YouTube, and certainly not when the internet never forgets.