An x.com account using your name and photographs to sell content is impersonation, and it goes through a report that asks about identity rather than about copyright. That route works even when the images the account is using are not yours, which is the common case.
Left up, 40 exposed copies work out to an estimated $234 a month in diverted subscriptions. Estimate, not a measurement: it assumes 0.45 diverted subscribers per exposed post at an average subscription price of $12.99. Your number depends on your pricing and audience.
Removal route for x.com
Resolved live · no account · nothing uploaded
A notice for x.com goes to a curated route openDMCA already holds.
2 · RDAP abuse contact— resolves.abuse@godaddy.com — the registrar's abuse desk, not x.com itself. Probed 2026-09-04.
3 · Fallback address— not needed.Not needed — an earlier rung resolved.
4 · Network and search— runs next.Cloudflare detection over DNS-over-HTTPS, then Google and Bing delisting of every indexed x.com URL.
What happens to what you type: nothing. The domain is matched against openDMCA's routing table in your browser. No request is made to x.com, no page is fetched, and the text is not stored or sent anywhere.
Record the account and the pattern. Capture the x.com handle, the profile URL and several posts with dates. An impersonation report is about how an account presents itself, not about a single item.
Note where it sends people. Impersonating x.com accounts usually funnel followers to a paid link elsewhere. Recording that destination identifies the commercial harm and strengthens the report.
File the impersonation report. Use the x.com impersonation route, which openDMCA holds as a curated form with a defined field list: the impersonating handle, your contact address and the identity being copied.
File copyright separately if your photos are used. Where the account uses images you made, the copyright route applies as well. They are separate reports reaching separate processes, and both are worth filing.
Delist the profile URL afterwards. An x.com profile URL can stay indexed after the account is gone. Where it returns for your name, submit it for delisting as its own request.
Why impersonation is a separate route on x.com
Copyright asks who owns a work. Impersonation asks who someone is claiming to be. A creator whose face is used alongside someone else's photographs fails the first question and passes the second, which is why the routing decision matters more than persistence.
openDMCA stores the x.com impersonation route as a form rather than an address, so the report is dispatched to a process that can act on identity rather than into a copyright queue that cannot.
openDMCA gives the first two hops away: you can open which route your case belongs in and run it on a URL of your own, with no account and nothing uploaded.
One thing that catches people out on x.com
The impersonation route openDMCA holds for x.com asks for a handle rather than a URL, which is a small difference with a large consequence: a report built around post URLs can be rejected as incomplete even when it documents the problem perfectly, because the form is asking who is being impersonated rather than what was copied.
Frequently asked questions
The account uses my name but not my photos.
That is impersonation rather than copyright, and the impersonation route applies. A copyright notice would fail because nothing of yours is being copied.
Do I need to prove my identity?
The report asks for enough to establish the account is presenting as you. Requirements vary and openDMCA does not give legal advice about what will satisfy them.
What if the account also reposts my content?
File both routes. They reach different processes with different evidence, and an account doing both is not fully addressed by either one alone.
Work out which route your case belongs in — free, no account.