ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: gabon on January 31, 2012, 01:12:59 AM
-
When should a recipient of a settlement letter ask Getty, Mccormack, NCS, to cease communications?
and what are the possible consequences?
-
You can ask at anytime, but it will fall on deaf ears, they will continue to contact you.NCS Recovery once notified in writing that you dispute the "claim" ( as it is not a debt) by law have to send it back to Getty, or they can be reported, Getty will then pass it along to McCormack, who will send letters. The only way to have them stop is to either pay it, or hire an attorney to represent you, then all communications must go thru the lawyer..
-
if a request is made to getty , mcormack, ncs, to cease all communications about the settlement, should they legaly stop communicating ?
(Let them sue)
-
The short answer is probably not, and that would likely just stir the pot, you would be better suited to offer an amount ( which they would probably turn down), and IF they sued at least you have it on record that you at least tried to work with them. If you really want them to stop, pay Oscar the 195.00 to represent you with a letter, if you don't want to pay that , you'll just need to get used to the fact that you will be involved in this for some time..up to 3 years in fact.
-
Don't ever invite anyone to sue you! Someone may take you up on it one day.
Do your research on Getty that way those communications don't bother you so much. Remember, they are only letters. They don't mean anything unless you believe they will do something.
And I agree with Buddhapi, they won't stop. In fact, if you let on you want them to stop, that is a sign of weakness that they are getting to you. They tend to back off of people they know will fight and will become a waste of time and resources.
However, if you are so emotionally bothered, like Buddhapi suggested, go hire Oscar for $195. Problem solved. I tell people you have to pay one way or another. If you don't want to pay money then you get educated and grow a spine. But what Oscar offers is quick and immediate. I do recommend that also.
if a request is made to getty , mcormack, ncs, to cease all communications about the settlement, and to sue if they choose to, should they legaly stop communicating ?
-
from the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
====
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.
If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt.
Does this apply also to any entity, like Getty or Mccormack?
-
Such rules apply only to actual collection agencies, unfortunately.
As long as the communications are lawful, it would be difficult to stop Getty or McCormack from contacting you.
That's one of their most powerful tactics; they keep at you for a long time.
It works, as many people get tired of it over time, and settle with them.
There's only three ways to stop the communications, or stop them from reaching you directly:
1) Retain a lawyer (such as Oscar), and Getty will have to communicate with him.
2) Make a settlement with them Getty.
3) Hold out for the three year statute of limitations to run out.
If was easy as telling them "don't bother me", we wouldn't need this forum, lawyers or even copyright law! lol.
If the issue is about one or two images, and you don't want to be bothered, Oscar's letter program is a good choice.
You won't get the letters anymore, and the likelihood of a lawsuit would be rather remote. You could sleep at night.
S.G.
-
from the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
====
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.
If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt.
Does this apply also to any entity, like Getty or Mccormack?
Looks like Soylent beat me to it. ;)
I do agree that it sounds like you might consider hiring Oscar for peace of mind.
-
Are repeated hounding communications lawful, however, if Getty or one of the other stock photo companies claims exclusivity when in fact they do not have exclusive rights?
If a company knowingly claims and even reaffirms in writing that they have exclusive rights to an image when that's not true... could that be grounds for a countersuit from a demand letter recipient?
-
I know of at least one Getty recipient that let loose a tirade of vitriol-infused R-rated language that would have made a drunken sailor blush like a schoolgirl. Through a barrage of "eF's" and "eSSes" he stated that there was no way in hell they would spend the money for the lawyers to pursue this case, and if they did he'd see them in court. He slammed down the phone and claims he never heard from them again.
I would not, however, suggest this as a tactic.
But at a certain point you will find something that they won't be willing (or able) to do. And then every call they make to you will be answered with, "I'm sorry but I'm tied up with a client at the moment, call back tomorrow" and/or "I told you last time, I need you to send me the paperwork proving that you created this work and registered it." (Or reveal the chain of title for the copyright work, or show the history of what they charged for the image, or some other item.) At a certain point they will refuse, you will point out that you are making a good faith attempt to sort out the legitimacy of their claim. Yes they will threaten to go to court. You have to step up, shrug and tell them that their lack of cooperation is not going to look very favorable in the eyes of a judge.
Please keep it all in perspective. These people are not your betters and they certainly don't have your interest at heart. Stop asking and start telling.
-
Mcfilms,
You are the bomb. In life, you try to be nice, you try to be civil, you try to be reasonable, you try to be logical, you try to be cooperative, you try to be understanding, etc. But sometimes, a single but simple pop in the nose is what it takes to get the message across.
Last but not least... "Stop asking and start telling." Simply elegant. Simply classic. Love that quote.
I know of at least one Getty recipient that let loose a tirade of vitriol-infused R-rated language that would have made a drunken sailor blush like a schoolgirl. Through a barrage of "eF's" and "eSSes" he stated that there was no way in hell they would spend the money for the lawyers to pursue this case, and if they did he'd see them in court. He slammed down the phone and claims he never heard from them again.
Stop asking and start telling.
-
Good discussion.
MF will usually send information about its ownership of intellectual property.
So, at least it's easier to make an informed decision in that case.
Now, for me personally.
For everyone else who doesn't send any information about who owns the intellectual property in question:
I wouldn't pay them. I would cease communications with them if a request for clarification of ownership is denied.
Some may say, "they might sue". Sure, they might pay the hundred dollars and sue. But, then I'd get the information that I want at the discovery stage.
Then, I can either settle if everything is "legit" (and Soylent doesn't think it's legit BTW).
Or, if the paperwork isn't legit, I know that 99 percent of the time they'll back right off.
If it does go to court, I get to fight it for shits and giggles. Then I win, collect all my fees and gloat about it on the Internet.
Heck, these days, you can get a letter from a "lawyer" who says "write a check made out to my trust account".
How do if that's an actual lawyer working for Getty, of just some fat toad with a shit-smeared ass-crack trolling for a quick buck?
How would I know if the "details" are "none of my business"? Wow. Let me get my check book. lol.
S.G.
-
I'm having a really crappy week here, and yet you manage to make me grin and smirk like a little kid! Just what I needed today!
-
I'm having a really crappy week here, and yet you manage to make me grin and smirk like a little kid! Just what I needed today!
Thank goodness for Soylent. Btw budd...what happened to that handsome avatar?
-
I'm having a really crappy week here, and yet you manage to make me grin and smirk like a little kid! Just what I needed today!
Thank goodness for Soylent. Btw budd...what happened to that handsome avatar?
I'm sure your referring to my dog right? I don't know what happened, maybe I got demoted or something. Not even a lime green box either..
-
Hey, when you update your profile, don't click "No Avatar", ok? Personally, I think you were just trying to sneak out the back door.
I'm sure your referring to my dog right? I don't know what happened, maybe I got demoted or something. Not even a lime green box either..
-
Hey, when you update your profile, don't click "No Avatar", ok? Personally, I think you were just trying to sneak out the back door.
I'm sure your referring to my dog right? I don't know what happened, maybe I got demoted or something. Not even a lime green box either..
I'm not sneaking out the back, sorry but your stuck with me and the only way to get rid of me, is to pay me an extremely high dollar amount...say like 5.00.
The problem with the avatar is the option for no avatar cannot be unchecked, it is selected by default..I don't think that was the "handsome" avatar that Peeved was referring to either.
-
I can't seem to submit an avatar. Do we need to be deemed worthy before we can do that? :(
-
Hey, when you update your profile, don't click "No Avatar", ok? Personally, I think you were just trying to sneak out the back door.
I'm sure your referring to my dog right? I don't know what happened, maybe I got demoted or something. Not even a lime green box either..
I'm not sneaking out the back, sorry but your stuck with me and the only way to get rid of me, is to pay me an extremely high dollar amount...say like 5.00.
The problem with the avatar is the option for no avatar cannot be unchecked, it is selected by default..I don't think that was the "handsome" avatar that Peeved was referring to either.
THERE is that handsome avatar I was talkin' about! So nice to hear we are stuck with you!
;)
-
I can't seem to submit an avatar. Do we need to be deemed worthy before we can do that? :(
I'm in the same boat. My only radio button says Personalized Picture - No avatar. So here is my Avatar:
};ยบ*
-
This issue (avatar) has been addressed before.
Please read the forums...! lol.
S.G.
-
Idea for revenue generation: a $50 dollar donation allows one to use an avatar.
Got my 50 bucks right here. lol.
link... link... hmmm...
See Matt's second post down here:
http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/buddhapi-has-officially-joined-the-eli-defense-team!/
S.G.
-
I tried opening up the avatar and the ability to post images before but then we had some "interesting" images go up which was really a distraction and resulted in some bothersome complaints I had to deal with.
I then restricted the avatar display to myself and Oscar since we were (at that time) the only people in this fight that was willing to "come out" and put our reputations on the line. Obviously, that has since changed since Buddhapi and Mcfilms have generously lend their names and reputations to the cause. And so they have the option of using their own photo or simply get a plain but bright colored box to make their posts stand out better.
There are other valued ELI contributors that I would like to assign an avatar to but it hasn't been a high priority to highlight more contributors simply because Buddhapi and Mcfilms have done such a tremendous tag-team job even when Oscar and I haven't been around.
When I had time, I do privately reach out to different individuals that have a good track record here on ELI to spotlight them. Some prefer to stay low-key, others don't mind the additional visibility.
If you have been a valued ELI contributor and would like to be recognized as such, send me a private email/message and let me know if you would like to stay anonymous or "come out". I will do my best to accommodate you. Just so you know, you are doing me/us a favor by volunteering but I don't pressure anyone to do so. I am simply happy people are here being passionate and engaged.
But there is no question in my mind that (if you are able to), your message and comment carries more weight when you fully identify yourself vs. doing so with an alias or pen name. Thus far, there are 4 of us who lend our names to the fight. I would like more but it has to be voluntary and organic.
I don't have absolute rules on the avatars, images, and similar issues, only general guidelines that evolve depending on the ELI Forum needs.
But the bottom line is, here on the ELI Forums, the avatar is being used as a credibility-building device, not as a way for artistic self-expression.
Hope that clears up the avatar situation.
I can't seem to submit an avatar. Do we need to be deemed worthy before we can do that? :(
-
Reading the exchange just made me wonder, so I looked and saw I couldn't put one up. I use an avatar of my cat eating a chipmunk at my blog, but I would put up a real face picture here. Of course it would be 10 years old so I would look cuter. :)
By the way, I understand and sympathize with the "interesting" images issue. I don't know what simplemachines software permits easily, but maybe if it permits you to let people upload avatars after some number of comments (50? 100?) you'll get mostly legitimate images. It's not a big deal for me though. I was just curious (and I guess I should have used search!)
-
Hey, when you update your profile, don't click "No Avatar", ok? Personally, I think you were just trying to sneak out the back door.
I'm sure your referring to my dog right? I don't know what happened, maybe I got demoted or something. Not even a lime green box either..
I'm not sneaking out the back, sorry but your stuck with me and the only way to get rid of me, is to pay me an extremely high dollar amount...say like 5.00.
The problem with the avatar is the option for no avatar cannot be unchecked, it is selected by default..I don't think that was the "handsome" avatar that Peeved was referring to either.
THERE is that handsome avatar I was talkin' about! So nice to hear we are stuck with you!
;)
Are you flirting with me?? I'm blushing like a dog over here.. :-*