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

How Our Footage Was Misused »

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.

Index

»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
»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),
• news.com.au (Australia),
• The Australian (Australia),
• 鳳凰衛視PhoenixTV (China/HK),
• 鳳凰資訊 PhoenixTVNews (China/HK),
• 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.