Data from 2022 [13] confirm this trend, with search engines like Google Search [14] generating 68.6 million URLs linked to potentially bypassed authorship-claimed digital works. The UK Government's Intellectual Property Office [15; 16] annually issues the Online Copyright Infringement Tracking Report, which examines the browsing behavior of a representative sample of users based on their queries in various search engines. This analysis contributes to the classification of websites, guided by the nature and reputation of the content they offer, meticulously evaluating potential infringements of intellectual property rights. Within this framework, the categorization of websites in terms of copyright infringement is segmented into three categories: legal, mixed legal and infringing, and infringing sites. The first category, pertaining to legal sites, is dedicated to promoting, offering, and distributing content endorsed by the authors or their representatives, as well as works belonging to the public domain. The second category, the mixed ones, partially conform to intellectual property regulations, hosting both authorized works and those that are not. The sites in the third category, identified as infringers, engage in a total violation of intellectual property rights, with the reasons for and consequences of such infringement falling under the purview and discretion of the site's owner and administrator. In Figure 1, the most frequently consumed categories are detailed according to the indices previously mentioned. These, are divided by the type of material and how users accessed the content: books/E-books/digital magazines, software, film/series/TV, and music. Following this train of thought, there emerges a discernible concern and an overriding need to identify and eliminate materials that infringe copyright in the IoE, through a more efficient and automated process [12; 13; 15; 16]. According to [17; 18], in the absence of such measures, the ramifications of these infringements could surpass the mere financial losses currently faced by the industry. These implications include the ethical degradation of work, the introduction of biases in professional training and cultural sectors, a decline in the quality of new creations, and the potential for highly sought-after works to be used as bait in cyber attacks, encompassing malware, phishing, scams, and electronic fraud. Currently, two primary methods address websites with infringing content over the IoE: legal removal requests and technical tools for scanning and flagging content [19; 20]. Responsibility for this falls to entities like the DMCA and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) [21], who assess these requests. Despite this, the high volume of  
Figure 1: Different categories of multimedia content consumed based on the browsing behavior of a randomly selected group of users, according to the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office [16]. complaints has led to the rise of private monitoring services, whose detection techniques are often undisclosed due to privacy concerns [22]. Unfortunately, the policies of Internet Service Providers (ISP) can complicate the removal of infringing content, necessitating monitoring for early detection [23]. Collaborative efforts across industries and academia are developing solutions like browser extensions to deter visits to infringing sites, perimeter security rules to block malicious links, whitelists, and digital watermarking, focusing primarily on prevention scopes [24; 25; 26]. Although automated searches in this field have not yet fully matured, the value of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and particularly Deep Learning (DL) as promising alternatives is increasingly being recognized. The predictive capacity of these technologies to identify patterns indicative of copyright infringement in multimedia content is prematurely being explored [27].