Received a CopyTrack or Picright Claim? Is It Legitimate?

CopyTrack and PicRights are companies that represent photographers and rights holders in recovering compensation for unlicensed use of their images. If you received a claim from one of them, the most important question is: did you actually use the image on your website without a valid licence?

In most cases, the answer is yes. And in that case, the claim is legitimate.

Before you respond to the letter, it's worth knowing whether your website has other compliance gaps that could attract attention. You can scan your website for free to get an overview of what's visible to crawlers and enforcement agencies.

What CopyTrack and PicRights Do

Both companies operate the same model:

1. Photographers and agencies register their image portfolios with the service
2. The service uses automated image recognition technology to scan websites worldwide for matching images
3. When a match is found on a website that cannot demonstrate a valid licence, the service sends a claim to the website operator
4. The claim seeks payment of a retroactive licence fee, typically with a multiplier for unlicensed use

This is legal activity. Copyright law protects photographers' work. You generally need permission and payment to use a photograph on your website. The scanning and claiming activity is lawful enforcement of existing copyright rights.

Are These Companies Legitimate?

Yes. Both CopyTrack and PicRights are registered, operating businesses.

• CopyTrack is a Berlin-based company founded in 2015 and operates internationally. It represents photographers and image agencies and uses automated image recognition to track unlicensed use across the web.
• PicRights (PicRights Europe GmbH) is headquartered in Pfaffikon, Switzerland. It enforces copyright on behalf of major agencies including AFP and Reuters, and is active in the Netherlands and across the EU.

These are not scams. They represent real rights holders enforcing real copyright claims.

This distinguishes them from some fraudulent "copyright trolls" who send demands based on images they do not actually represent. If you receive a claim and want to verify it, ask the company to provide:

• The name of the rights holder they represent
• Proof of their authorisation to act on behalf of that rights holder
• The specific image in question and where it appeared on your website

Both legitimate services will provide this information. Note that automated detection systems do produce false positives, so this verification step matters.

A note on the name confusion

You may also encounter Pictoright, a Dutch collective management organisation based in Amsterdam that administers reproduction rights for Dutch and international visual artists in the Netherlands. Pictoright is a different organisation from PicRights. If a letter refers to Pictoright, it comes from this Dutch body rather than the Swiss enforcement company.

Your Legal Position

In the Netherlands, copyright is governed by the Auteurswet (Copyright Act). Copyright arises automatically when a work is created. There is no registration requirement. A photograph taken by a professional or amateur photographer is protected by copyright from the moment it is taken.

Under Article 1 Auteurswet: the maker of a work has the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute it. "Reproduce" includes displaying it on a website.

When infringement is established, Article 27 Auteurswet gives the rights holder the right to claim damages. Dutch courts typically set this as the licence fee that would have been owed, and can award additional profit recovery under Article 27a. This is why claims often exceed a simple stock-photo rate.

Using an image from Google Images, Pinterest or another website without a licence is infringement unless:

• You own the image (you took it)
• You have a licence (paid stock photo site, Creative Commons licence)
• The image is in the public domain (typically work where copyright has expired, at least 70 years after the author's death)
• You are covered by a copyright exception (parody, quotation for specific purposes). These are narrow exceptions that almost never apply to commercial website use.

"I didn't know I needed a licence" is not a legal defence in the Netherlands. Good faith is a mitigating factor for damages, but it does not eliminate the copyright violation.

What to Do When You Receive a Claim

Step 1: Identify the image

Find the image on your website that the claim refers to. The claim should include a screenshot or URL showing where the image appeared. Locate it.

Step 2: Assess your position

Ask yourself honestly: did you have a licence to use this image?

You did not use the image, or it is no longer on your site: The image may have been used and removed. Or it may be a false positive. In either case, respond to the claim in writing, state that the image is not currently in use, and if it was used without a licence, note when it was removed.

You have a valid licence: Find the licence documentation. This could be:

• The purchase confirmation from a stock photo site
• The Creative Commons licence terms and attribution
• A contract with the photographer

Respond with proof of your licence. The claim should be withdrawn.

You do not have a licence: You used the image without authorisation. The claim is valid. Read Section below.

Step 3: Remove the image

If the image is still on your website, remove it immediately. This stops any ongoing infringement and demonstrates good faith.

Step 4: Do not ignore the claim

Ignoring a claim leads to escalation, typically to a law firm and then to court proceedings. The cost of ignoring is higher than the cost of engaging. Courts can award:

• The licence fee (what you should have paid)
• Damages (additional compensation for the infringement)
• Costs of the rights enforcement
• Legal costs

This often results in amounts significantly higher than the initial claim.

If the Claim Is Valid: What to Do

If you used the image without a licence, you have limited options:

Option A: Negotiate the claim amount

Both CopyTrack and PicRights' initial claim amounts are calculated formulas (usually 2-3× the standard licence fee for the image and period of use). These amounts are negotiable in many cases. Respond professionally, acknowledge the infringement, demonstrate that the image has been removed and ask whether a settlement amount can be agreed.

Factors that typically support negotiation:

• Small website with limited traffic
• Short period of use
• Image removed promptly after receiving the claim
• No commercial advantage gained from the image specifically
• Non-commercial or non-profit context

Option B: Challenge the calculation

If the licence fee calculation seems disproportionate, you can challenge the methodology. Ask for the standard licence rate (what you would have paid at the time) and why a multiplier applies. Dutch courts generally recognise standard licence rates as the baseline for damages.

Option C: Accept and pay

If the claim is clearly valid and the amount is reasonable, paying promptly (often with a discount for early payment) is the lowest-cost resolution.

Receiving a Claim Letter in the Netherlands: What to Check First

If you receive a copyright demand letter as a Dutch business, there are a few practical checks specific to the Netherlands.

Check that the letter includes a KVK number. Under Dutch law, businesses are required to include their Chamber of Commerce (Kamer van Koophandel) registration number in official commercial correspondence. A letter from a legitimate enforcement company will include this, or their EU equivalent registration. If the letter demands payment but provides no company identification, treat it with caution.

Check for a specific image URL. A credible claim always references the exact URL where the image appeared and includes a screenshot or timestamp. A letter that only describes "images on your website" without specifics is not a substantiated claim.

Do not pay before verifying. Payment to a legitimate company goes to a business bank account in the company's name. If payment details are a personal IBAN or a payment portal with no company branding, do not proceed.

If you suspect a letter is fraudulent, you can report it to the Autoriteit Consument en Markt (ACM) via its consumer reporting channel, or file a report with the police via politie.nl.

KVK guidance. The Kamer van Koophandel has published guidance on copyright photo claims for Dutch businesses. It's a useful plain-language starting point if you're unfamiliar with how copyright works in practice.

What to Do Going Forward

After resolving the claim, audit all images on your website:

1. Self-taken photos: No licence needed. You own the copyright.
2. Stock photo purchases: Keep all purchase confirmations and receipts
3. Creative Commons images: Keep the licence URL and comply with attribution requirements
4. Images from agencies: Keep the contract and licence scope (which sites, which periods)
5. Images you cannot trace: Replace them

Free sources with usable licences:

• Unsplash: free for commercial use, no attribution required (some images have resale restrictions)
• Pexels: free for commercial use, no attribution required
• Pixabay: free for commercial use, no attribution required
• Wikimedia Commons: check individual image licences, which vary from public domain to CC-BY-SA

Always download the image and check the specific licence terms before use. Licences on these platforms occasionally change.

If You Believe the Claim Is a False Positive

Automated image recognition has false positives. If you are certain you do not use the image, or the image the claim refers to is one you own or have licenced, take these steps:

1. Respond in writing, clearly disputing the claim
2. Provide evidence: your original photo, your licence or a dated document showing you owned or licenced the image before the claimed infringement date
3. Ask them to provide proof that you specifically used their client's image (not a similar one)

If the claim company cannot substantiate the claim with specific evidence, you are not obligated to settle.

For related guidance on receiving a Getty Images demand letter, see our Getty Images letter guide.

---

This article is technical analysis, not legal advice. Consult a lawyer for advice specific to your situation.