Copyright Resolution Resources

To streamline the resolution of copyright infringements—such as copyright strikes and DMCA takedowns—we’ve created this dedicated resource to help you resolve issues efficiently and legally.

At MRIPETCTSOURCE, we take copyright protection seriously. Our team of medical experts and content creators invests substantial time, effort, and resources to develop accurate, high-quality content for our audience—patients and professionals seeking reliable medical insights. This content is distributed across multiple platforms, including YouTube, our website, and social media channels.

*Important Notice*

All copyright strike removals require:
- A signed settlement agreement.
- Payment of missed licensing fees and damages.
Educational use exemptions apply only to:
- Verified faculty at accredited institutions.
- Students using content in non-commercial, academic projects.
Fair Use:
- Determinations are made on a case-by-case basis.
- If enforcement has already occurred, your usage has been reviewed and deemed not Fair Use.
- Fair Use is a legal defense, not a license. Disputes must be litigated in U.S. Federal Court.
- Learn more in the fair use section below.

Step-by-Step Resolution Process

Step 1: Log in or Create a free MRIPETCTSOURCE account. Optionally, add social accounts under My Account>Profile Settings to streamline process.
Step 2: Return to this page and add the required licensing and resolution fees to your cart. Must login to view selections and discount codes (if applicable).
Step 3: Proceed to checkout and complete payment. Discount codes (if applicable) will be applied at checkout.
Step 4: After payment and agreement submission, our Copyright Support Team will review and, if all terms are met, lift the copyright strike.

Note: This agreement covers past unauthorized use only. Any future use requires a separate license.

First, Select the Appropriate Licensing Categories

Choose the appropriate license(s) for the content used:

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

Please ensure all required compliance and processing fees are added before submitting your order. Our team will verify all submitted details before proceeding with any copyright strike removal.

If the infringing content was used across multiple platforms (e.g., LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook), a separate license must be added for each individual use or platform. For example, if a video was posted on three platforms, three licenses are required.

Once your order is submitted, our copyright support team will review your case for accuracy. If all required information is provided and all applicable fees—including per-use licensing—are paid in full, your copyright strike will be lifted. Applicable discounts will be applied automatically at checkout.

Next, Add Applicable Fees and Compliance Costs

In some cases, additional fees may apply depending on the nature and severity of the copyright infringement. Below is a breakdown of these charges. Please select from the following as appropriate.

1. Copyright Strike Removal Fee (add one per infringement)

This fee applies to each individual copyright infringement or strike being resolved. If your account has multiple strikes, a fee must be added for each.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

2. Copyright Detection & Investigation Fee (one per order)

This covers the internal review process, including manual investigation and AI-based detection of infringement across platforms. This fee is mandatory for all cases.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

3. Watermark Removal Fee (if applicable)

This fee applies when the infringing content has had watermarks or branding removed or obscured. This is considered an attempt to conceal original ownership and is subject to additional penalties.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

5. Unauthorized Modification Fee (if applicable)

Applies if the original content was altered without permission (e.g., edited visuals, cropped branding, audio changes, etc.). This reflects the additional legal complexity of enforcing modified content.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

4. Filing and Administrative Fee (when required)

Covers the cost of processing copyright enforcement actions, including DMCA notices, legal filings, and correspondence with platforms or third parties. This may also include notarized documentation or international processing costs.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

6. No Attribution Fee (if applicable)

If you used our content without proper credit or attribution (as required under our terms), this fee helps address reputational impact and lost visibility associated with the misuse.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

7. Late Resolution Fee (if applicable)

For cases where infringers fail to respond to initial warnings or delay settlement past the specified notice period. This helps offset the added administrative burden and extended enforcement actions.

Restricted content. Please sign in to view. Sign up for a free account for access to our entire library of radiology resources.

Additional Notes

Discounts based on country or economic hardship are applied at checkout.
All fees must be paid in full before any takedown removal or licensing agreement is finalized.
The presence or absence of specific fees will be determined during our internal review.
This portal is for resolving past unauthorized use only.
Fees are non-refundable once a resolution process is initiated.
Continued use without a license may result in renewed enforcement.

Please understand that this agreement only covers past use and does not allow for future use of content. Any future use of content requires a separate license.

Last Step: Checkout

Include your name, linked URLs, report number, and reference numbers for a streamlined resolution. Once your checkout is complete, your order will be linked to your account and the copyright strike will be removed from your account. View your cart below below or click here if you are ready to checkout.

Once payment is received and the agreement is submitted, our Copyright Support Team will carefully review your case. If all terms and conditions are satisfied, the copyright strike will be formally lifted and the matter will be marked as resolved. This ensures a clean resolution and helps both parties move forward without further legal action.

Standard License Rates

For comparison purposes only:

To illustrate the cost difference, you can view similar stock images available from major providers. Please note, these links are provided solely to highlight typical market pricing — MRIPETCTSOURCE (medicalimagingsource.com) is not affiliated with these companies.

See https://www.medicalimagingsource.com/copyright-request-form for the most up-to-date pricing.

Our Rates – Vary by Asset Class. For more information, visit:

https://www.medicalimagingsource.com/product-category/rights-managed-video (must be logged in to view)
https://www.medicalimagingsource.com/product-category/rights-managed-photos (must be logged in to view)

Additional Fees

In addition to standard licensing fees, certain additional fees may apply depending on the nature and severity of the copyright infringement. These fees account for administrative costs, unauthorized modifications, commercial misuse, and repeat violations. These fees are designed to encourage compliance with copyright laws, deter future infringements, and streamline the resolution process. Depending on the specific case, one or more of the following fees may be applied to the total cost of resolving the infringement.

Commercial Use Fee – A higher-tier fee for cases where the copyrighted content was used in a commercial context (e.g., advertisements, monetized videos, or brand promotions).

Repeat Infringement Penalty – Applied when the infringer has a history of prior copyright violations, discouraging repeated misuse.

DMCA Takedown Processing Fee – Covers the costs of filing DMCA takedown requests with platforms or hosting providers.

Legal Consultation Fee – If legal review or consultation is required to assess the infringement case, this fee may apply.

Revenue Recapture Fee – If the infringing content generated revenue (e.g., ad revenue, affiliate commissions), this fee accounts for the estimated earnings from the unauthorized use.

Legal Ramifications of Not Resolving Copyright Infringements

Under the US Copyright Statute (17 U.S.C. § 507), copyright holders have 3 years from the date of the infringement or from the date they discovered the infringement to file a lawsuit in federal court for copyright infringement. Failing to resolve copyright violations within this period can result in legal consequences, including the potential for statutory damages and other penalties.

Willful Infringement

A willful infringement occurs when the infringer knowingly or recklessly disregards the copyright holder’s rights. For example, if a DMCA takedown notice was issued for infringing content and a counterclaim was subsequently filed, resulting in the content being reinstated and made publicly viewable, it’s important to understand the potential legal consequences. If the infringing content continues to be used after being restored, it may be considered willful infringement by the courts, significantly increasing potential liability. Any counterclaim filed in response to a DMCA notice will be treated as the initiation of a legal dispute and may result in a formal lawsuit being filed. Misuse of the counterclaim process—such as filing in bad faith or to avoid accountability—can expose the respondent to additional statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and potential sanctions under the law.

The fact that the content was initially taken down due to an infringement notice and then publicly reinstated after a counterclaim may suggest that the infringer continued to use the copyrighted content despite being made aware of the rights violation. Courts may view this as willful infringement, which can result in higher statutory damages—ranging from $750 to $30,000 per work infringed, or up to $150,000 per work for willful infringement.

Even after the reinstatement of the content, the copyright holder still has the right to file a copyright infringement lawsuit within the 3-year statute of limitations. This 3-year period begins from the date of the infringement or the date of discovery of the infringement, and it remains in effect even if the content was reinstated after a counterclaim. This means that, should the content continue to infringe, the copyright holder may still take legal action within the 3 years, potentially seeking statutory damages and other legal remedies.

Statutory Damages and Attorney’s Fees

The Copyright Act provides for statutory damages rather than actual damages, allowing copyright holders to claim set amounts for each act of infringement. These damages are typically easier to prove than actual damages, as you are not required to show how much financial loss you’ve suffered due to the infringement. In cases where the infringement is found to be willful, the court can award up to $150,000 per infringed work, which can significantly increase the financial liability of the infringer.

Additionally, the copyright holder may be entitled to recover attorney’s fees and court costs, further escalating the financial burden on the infringer.

Registered Works

It is important to note that all media featured on our website and across our media outlets are registered with the United States Copyright Office. This registration provides us with enhanced legal rights and protections under the U.S. Copyright Act. It allows us to take legal action for infringement, demand statutory damages, and seek attorney’s fees.

If you wish to settle the matter amicably, we offer licensing options that will help resolve the issue and allow you to use our copyrighted content lawfully. Ignoring this matter could result in us taking further legal action to enforce our rights, which may include seeking statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and other legal remedies.

Does My Work Qualify For Fair Use?

For inquiries regarding fair use, we recommend first consulting the U.S. Copyright Office’s Fair Use Index. If you’ve received a DMCA takedown notice or a copyright strike on platforms like YouTube, we can provide helpful resources on potential reasons your media usage may have infringed upon copyright laws.

Compilation Videos and Fair Use

A compilation video often consists of various clips, images, music, or other media, each of which can be owned by different copyright holders. When a creator uses this compilation format without properly identifying the rights holders of each individual component, they risk infringing on multiple copyrights simultaneously.

Since each component of the compilation (music, clips, etc.) is protected by copyright, using it without permission violates the rights of each of the respective copyright holders. Even if the compilation itself seems to be freely available (e.g., online), the underlying works are still protected.

Failure to perform due diligence

Failing to perform due diligence—such as not making reasonable efforts to locate and contact the owners of each individual work—can strengthen a claim of infringement, particularly if the original works are clearly owned by identifiable parties. Reference Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens, Inc.

Statutory Damages

Copyright infringement can lead to statutory damages, which can range from $750 to $30,000 per work infringed, and up to $150,000 per work if the infringement is found to be willful.

Legal Fees

If the court rules in favor of the copyright holders, the infringer could be required to pay the copyright holders’ attorney’s fees and other litigation costs.

Fair Use Guidelines

If relying on fair use, ensure the use is transformative and doesn’t take the most important parts of the copyrighted works. Adding commentary alone may not be enough to justify fair use without significant changes in context or meaning. Combining works or adding commentary without sufficient transformation does not qualify as fair use as evident in Fox News Network, LLC v. TVEyes, Inc. (2018) and Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. ComicMix LLC (2020).

1. Portion of work used

One of the primary reasons for a copyright violation often involves using the central or essential part of a copyrighted work, known as the “heart of the work.” This concept plays a significant role in fair use determinations, as established in legal precedents like the Harper & Rowe case and Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, as explained on copyright.gov’s About Fair Use Section.

Even if only a small portion is used, if it represents the “heart” of the work, it is more likely to be found infringing. Courts consider whether the part used is the most important or revealing. Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television, Inc.

Courts have consistently ruled that even small uses of copyrighted material can exceed fair use if they appropriate the core elements that embody the work’s essence or diminish its market value. Therefore, it’s crucial for individuals and organizations to carefully assess the extent and significance of the material used when determining whether their use qualifies as fair under copyright law.

Using a substantial portion or the entirety of a copyrighted work tends to weigh heavily against fair use, as it suggests an attempt to substitute for the original.

2. Competing keywords and market competition

The second most common reason for a copyright infringement is if the use harms the current or potential market for the original work or derivative works (such as sequels or adaptations), it strongly weighs against fair use as evident in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music.

This also occurs when copyrighted material is used in a way that directly competes with or substitutes the original work in a commercial or market context. Courts often consider whether the new use of the copyrighted material serves as a substitute for the original, potentially impacting its market value or commercial opportunities. Such cases underscore the importance of considering not only the amount and nature of the material used but also its potential economic impact on the original work’s market or audience.

3. What Constitutes Educational Use?

Purpose – The purpose of the use should be for educational or other transformative purposes rather than commercial gain.
Nature of the Work – The nature of the copyrighted work, such as whether information is factual, non-deceptive, or a creative work, influences the determination of fair use.
Amount Used – The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, ensuring that the core or “heart” of the work is not used in a way that undermines the original creator’s rights or market potential.
Effect on Market – The effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

If the use of the work is primarily for commercial gain, it is less likely to be considered fair use. Courts often view commercial use as exploitative of the copyrighted material for profit, especially when compared to non-profit or educational use as evident in Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises.

Media published on platforms like YouTube, Patreon, X (formerly Twitter), Medium, personal websites, commercial websites, or any other monetizable platform does not meet the criteria for educational use under U.S. Copyright guidelines. While a video may claim educational use in its messages, description, or meta description, this indicates its prior use in an educational setting, however publishing it on a commercially viable or monetized platform requires additional licensing before publication to avoid copyright strikes, DMCA takedown, or further legal action. Republishing an educational video without proper licensing from the copyright owner constitutes a deliberate violation of copyright law, carrying fines of up to $150,000 per infringement.

4. What is a Transformative work?

A transformative edit of a video typically involves altering the original content in a way that adds new expression, meaning, or message to the work. Here are examples of edits that would not be considered transformative and could potentially lead to a copyright violation:

Simple Reposting: Uploading the original video or a substantial portion of it without adding significant new content, commentary, or critique.

Minor Alterations: Making minor edits such as changing the video speed, adding simple effects, or reordering clips without substantially changing the original meaning or purpose.

Dubbing or Subtitling: Translating or adding subtitles without providing additional commentary or context that transforms the original work.

Reposting Without Permission: Reuploading someone else’s video to another platform or channel without the creator’s permission, even if the content remains unchanged.

In contrast, edits that are transformative include adding substantial commentary (at a level beyond the current subject matter), criticism, parody, or using the original content to create a new message or expression that significantly differs from the original. Transformative edits typically serve a different purpose or audience than the original work, thereby avoiding copyright infringement by adding new value rather than merely duplicating or modifying the original content.

5. List of Factors That Weigh Against Fair Use

A. Denying credit to copyright owner or original source

Failure to attribute the original creator of the work may suggest an intent to appropriate the work unfairly, which weighs against fair use.

In Rogers v. Koons, the court ruled against artist Jeff Koons, in part because he did not credit the original creator whose work he had copied.

B. Published to the Web or Public Domain

Posting copyrighted material online or making it publicly accessible without authorization is more likely to be found infringing, especially because it can be widely distributed. A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.

C. Long-Term Use or Repeated Use

Repeated or long-term use without permission may be seen as infringing because it demonstrates an ongoing exploitation of the copyrighted material. American Geophysical Union v. Texaco Inc

D. Reasonably Available Licensing Mechanism for Use of the Copyrighted Work

If a licensing mechanism is available and reasonable, failing to obtain a license may weigh against fair use, as it suggests an avoidance of the proper legal channels. Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films.

E. Replaces Sale of Copyrighted Work

If the use of the copyrighted material could act as a substitute for purchasing the original, it is more likely to be considered infringement, as it harms the market for the original. Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises.

F. Bad-Faith Behavior

Using a work with the intent to undermine the copyright owner’s rights or with malicious motives, such as knowingly copying without permission, can be seen as acting in bad faith, tilting the scales against fair use.

G. Profiting from Use

When a user profits directly from the use of the copyrighted material, it often tilts the balance against fair use. This is tied to whether the purpose of the use is commercial or transformative.

Key Takeaways

In sum, all these factors are considered on a case-by-case basis, and no single factor is determinative. Using the “heart” of the work often weighs heavily against fair use, even if the amount taken is relatively small. This is especially true if the copied portion contains the most important or expressive aspects of the work. Courts weigh multiple considerations to determine whether the use was transformative, non-commercial, and fair—including the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the original work. If you believe your use qualifies as fair use, please be prepared to defend that position in a court of law.

The information provided by MRIPETCTSOURCE (“we,” “us,” or “our”) on https://www.medicalimagingsource.com (the “Site”) is for general informational purposes only. All information on the Site is provided in good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information on the Site. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL WE HAVE ANY LABILITY TO YOU FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE OF ANY KIND INCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE USE OF THE SITE OR RELIANCE ON ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THE SITE. YOUR USE OF THE SITE AND YOUR RELIANCE ON ANY INFORMATION ON THE SITE IS SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.