Copyright and takedown
Where material appearing on TaleemPK belongs to a party who has not authorised its presence, that party may notify the platform for removal. Legal representation is not required to submit a report.
1. Scope
As an academic platform, a substantial proportion of content submitted originates from a third-party source by nature — an examination board's past paper, a textbook diagram, a teacher's handout. This is acknowledged directly. The platform acts on the following categories:
- Work submitted under false attribution. Sharing a teacher's notes with attribution is distinct from presenting them as one's own.
- Complete copyrighted works reproduced in full, such as an entire textbook, guide or published solution manual.
- Material subject to a removal request by the relevant right holder, irrespective of whether the platform independently concludes that infringement has occurred.
2. Submitting a report
The applicable procedure depends on the capacity of the reporting party.
2.1 Where the reporting party is the original author
The Report function within the post's menu should be used, selecting Copied content as the reason. This route is reviewed directly by the moderation team. The report should identify the location of the original material — a link, date, or earlier upload — to establish precedence.
2.2 Where the reporting party is a right holder submitting a formal notice
A submission should be made to the support desk, including:
- A direct link to the specific page on which the material appears.
- A description of the work in question, and the location at which the original may be viewed.
- The name of the reporting party and their relationship to the work (owner, author, or authorised agent).
- A statement of good-faith belief that the use is unauthorised.
- A statement affirming the accuracy of the information provided.
A complete notice is generally acted upon within three working days. An incomplete notice will result in delay solely attributable to the need to request further information.
3. Action taken
Where a complaint is clear, the material is removed and the party who submitted it is informed of the removal and its basis. Where the position is genuinely unclear, material may be removed pending review; this does not constitute a finding against the submitting party. Accounts that repeatedly submit infringing material are subject to restriction and subsequent removal.
4. Disputing a removal
The party who submitted the removed material may appeal via the support desk. An appeal is reviewed by a person other than the individual who ordered the removal. Where authorisation to post the material exists, this should be stated together with the nature of the authorisation, which resolves the majority of such disputes.
5. Automated matching and its limitations
Newly submitted content is compared against material already present on the platform. This process identifies re-submission and cross-account copying, which constitutes the majority of cases.
This process does not identify material copied from outside the platform. Content taken from a textbook or another website and submitted for the first time will have no existing match and will pass unflagged. This limitation is disclosed directly, as it underscores the continuing importance of the manual reporting function, given that an author who recognises their own work remains a more reliable means of detection than any automated comparison.
6. Official examination material
Past papers, date sheets and results are produced by the relevant examination boards. The platform reproduces this material for student access, with attribution to the originating board. Where a board requests removal or correction, the request is complied with.