Got a copyright takedown? Find out if it's real.

Fake or abusive takedowns usually fail to name the specific original work, come from an unverifiable sender, skip the required statement made under penalty of perjury, and often add urgency, threats, or a demand for payment. A valid notice names the exact copyrighted work, the infringing URL, the sender's real contact details, a good-faith-belief statement, and a perjury statement. Paste yours above to see which required elements are missing.

Under 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3) a valid notice must contain: (1) a signature of the rights-holder or agent; (2) identification of the specific copyrighted work; (3) identification of the infringing material and where to find it; (4) the sender's contact info; (5) a good-faith-belief statement; and (6) a statement, under penalty of perjury, that the info is accurate and the sender is authorized. Missing elements are a strong sign the notice is invalid.

Not necessarily. Platforms auto-enforce takedowns, which makes them a target for fake strikes used to silence creators or knock out competitors. Check whether the claim names a real, specific work you actually used, whether the sender is verifiable, and whether the legal statements are present. If they're missing, it may be abuse — and you can file a counter-notification.

Don't panic-delete your own content. Document the notice, check it against the §512 requirements, and if it's invalid you can file a counter-notification with the platform or host. For a takedown that threatens your income, consult a qualified attorney — this tool gives a triage signal, not legal advice.

Yes. In 2026, AI-generated takedown notices are being mass-produced to remove legitimate content, suppress criticism, and harass — and automated enforcement on major platforms makes them effective. They share tells: generic boilerplate phrasing, no identifiable original work, and an unverifiable sender.