ELI Forums > Getty Images Letter Forum

another copytrack letter

<< < (5/5)

Matthew Chan:
Actually, collection agencies can wrongfully tag your credit. Many collection agencies have a mechanism to report collection accounts. Collection agencies are supposed to verify before reporting to credit agencies but that frequently doesn't happen due to intentional or unintentional oversight. It happens a lot with unethical collection agencies.  It happens very frequently, more than you think.

The good news is the credit agencies have been legally spanked over the years to properly comply with certain rules when people report and contest negative entries on their credit report. If one contests a questionable entry by a collection agency, the credit agency is then required to get a response from the collection agent. If they don't respond in a timely or appropriate manner, the entry is automatically removed. Unfortunately, it falls upon the credit holder to know these things and act upon them.

I know of NO ONE besides myself (and I know a wide variety of people of various socio-economic and educational backgrounds in different professions) who regularly pulls and reviews their own credit report and scores on a regular basis.

And most people don't have the first clue to contest an incorrect entry on their credit report even if they were to pull and identify it.

Credit reporting, monitoring, and management is sadly still considered similar to the mystic arts even with the various free resources such as CreditKarma which is freely available to anyone to check on a weekly basis.

--- Quote from: Ethan Seven on August 17, 2018, 07:34:47 PM ---Copytrack calling it a debt is flat out wrong.  I think Robert is correct, it probably does implicate the FDCPA and whatever state law equivalent exists in your state. 

They cannot touch your credit. 

--- End quote ---

I too have just received a letter--now the 2nd one. I responded asking them for proof that the owner of the image will actually receive funds, and for proof that they are not just some webcrawler making bank while the actual owners of images (whether infringed or not) are unawares. My case is very similar to Dave101's. Same situation--I found the image on Facebook with a misleading caption, and I decided to share it on my science communication blog explaining why that image was misleading and how it contributes to the ignorance of the masses. Frankly, I didn't know there was some possible "in the public interest" kind of 'defense'. Anyway, I ignored the first email because I was suspicious, but went ahead and removed the blog containing the image altogether (it was from an old business that I haven't practiced in 5 years).  I also wondered if it was possible that some internet co. allegedly based in Germany would have any jurisdiction over me outside of Germany. Got the second email today, to which I replied as I stated above: "Put me in touch with the actual owner of the image, and THEN we'll talk." They can get someone to call all they want--the address and phone number on the page/blog are nearly 5 years old and no longer valid. I guess I'll keep ignoring them and using the advice I see above. If I hadn't forwarded the email on the page to a current email, they would never have reached me. And I'm assuming they're not about to try to get records from my country to find out where I am at present. Very glad to have found this site! I decided to google, "Copytrack scam" and this forum was at the top of the list!

I also got a letter from copytrack for the 2 photos of beaches in my country. I removed the photos from our company website and decided not to reply to any of their complaint letters of copytrack. I got a total of 3 letters. They never received any letter from me. And they eventually stopped.

If it is of help to anyone who got a letter from copytrack, here's a letter I got from a lawyer who specializes in International law>>

>>Hi again! I wanted to let you know I finally caught up with one of the partners in the firm where I work, a guy who has lots of experience with intellectual property law, He said basically the same thing I already told you: The burden is on Copytrack to prove that they own a copyright that you have violated, and if they want to pursue it, they'll have to bring the case in your jurisdiction (meaning the country where you're from). It's anyone's guess as to whether they think it's worth pursuing. The amount of money they're asking from you (read: trying to extort) may be a lot to you, but for a large corporation, it's pocket change.

The guy I talked to also had two additional insights: 1) copyright law is quite strict concerning liability, that is, if Copytrack can prove to a court that they own the copyright and you violated it, then you would have to pay whatever the law says for the violation (this is where you would need to consult a local lawyer, who can tell you what the local law says concerning copyright violation and how much that might cost). However, it is very uncommon in Finland, for example, for a court to award attorney's fees and costs to the winning party. So what I take from this is that if Copytrack takes the trouble to sue in a local court AND they manage to prove all of the above, then you would have to pay damages for the violation, but not necessarily their lawyers fees and costs (if they're threatening you with that).

The second insight I got from the guy I know is this: The more time passes, the less likely Copytrack will take any action. If you decide to simply not respond, they may not carry through on their threats, just because it's a lot of trouble to go through in order to collect what for them is a very small amount of money. You would then have to decide how you feel about not having any closure to the matter.

It does seem quite shady that Copytrack refuses to release the name of the actual copyright owner, or to produce the documentation saying the owner has transferred the copyright to them. That's the first thing they need to  be able to prove their case. Also, the lawyer I talked to has never heard of Copytrack, so I can't tell you what kind of reputation they have. You can decide what to make of that.

In any case, I think the best you can do is consult a local lawyer who can tell you what the penalty for this particular violation is under your country law (and whether it's less than Copytrack is demanding), and then decide which course of action to take.<<

This letter brought light to my situation with Copytrack. I'm guessing, Copytrack can tell if you're a person who would easily take their bait. They must have earned a lot of money from people who responded to their threat. But think about it, why would they spend thousands of dollars to pursue someone and just get a few hundred dollars in return? They will have to spend lawyer's fees. Besides, if Copyright has no office in a concerned country, they will have to send their own people, spend for his airfare, hotel accommodations, and in-country expenses just to pursue "pocket change". Doesn't make sense, does it?


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version