SWLEFSWLEFScreen Works Licensing & Evidence Framework

Methodology

Evidence Review Methodology

Last updated: 2026-07-07

This page explains how SWLEF reaches the status displayed on a registry record. The process is deliberately conservative: a record can only present as verified when evidence was actually submitted and reviewed. Everything else remains a reference.

Record statuses

  • Verified by evidence — evidence was submitted and reviewed for the rights scope displayed on the record. "Verified by submitted evidence and internal review."
  • Public metadata reference — catalogue information from public sources. Does not certify ownership, licensing authority, platform authorization, or chain of title.
  • Under review — evidence submitted, review not concluded.
  • Disputed — an active dispute or conflicting claim exists; do not rely on the record as final evidence.
  • Expired authorization — the evidenced authorization window has lapsed.
  • Private record — held privately at the registrant's request; details restricted to authorized reviewers.

Review layers

01
Company identity check
Corporate registration details, contact verification and, where applicable, register extracts for the submitting entity.
02
Submitted document review
Ownership declarations, production agreements, licences, assignments and supporting materials submitted by the registrant.
03
Chain-of-title review
Assessment of the documented chain of title across productions, acquisitions, licences and transfers, marked Yes / Partial / No.
04
License scope review
The specific rights covered — audio, video, publishing, distribution, monetization, enforcement — as evidenced by the documents.
05
Territory / language / window review
The territorial, language and time-window scope claimed and evidenced for the record.
06
Platform authorization scope
Whether platform-level administration (e.g. rights-management tooling) has been evidenced, and for which scope.
07
Conflict screening
Screening against existing registry records and known conflicting claims.
08
Duplicate registry screening
Detection of duplicate or overlapping records within the registry.
09
Sanctions / compliance risk screening
Screening of submitting parties against applicable sanctions and risk indicators, where applicable.
10
Expiry and revocation monitoring
Authorization windows carry validity dates; expired records are flagged and can no longer present as active.
11
Manual review notes
Internal reviewer notes are retained privately with each record for audit purposes.

Fields shown on each record

Every registry record displays a review summary: evidence submitted (Yes / No / Private), chain of title reviewed (Yes / No / Partial), platform authorization (Submitted / Not submitted / Not applicable), territory scope, rights scope, valid-from / valid-until dates, review date, reviewer type (internal / manual / system-assisted), confidence level (High / Medium / Limited) and dispute status.

Language we use — and avoid

SWLEF describes its work as reviewed evidence, submitted documents, registry records and evidence-based verification. SWLEF does not claim records are "legally proven forever", "court-certified", issued by an "official copyright authority", or "guaranteed accepted" by any platform. Verification reflects the evidence available at the time of review and is refreshed as new documentation, claims, or decisions are submitted.

Legal & policy index

ImpressumTerms of ServicePrivacy (GDPR)DisclaimerEvidence PolicyPlatform DisclaimerData RetentionAppeals & Disputes