Another fine example of Timothy B. McCormack the puking out garbage

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Quoted from Timothy B. McCormacks "Copyright Cow" blog

"7.   Photo Agencies such as Getty Images are Well Represented.
A photo agency’s life blood is their copyright protected images. One of the largest photo agencies in the world is Getty Images. Getty Images is an efficient organization when it comes to extracting damages from companies found to be infringing their copyrights. The bottom line is, their experts and lawyers know copyright law inside and out because that is all that they do day in and day out. Generally speaking, these representatives are easy to work with and professional; it is better to work with them as opposed to against them."

I'll start at the top "Well Represented" and "efficient organization", I think we need to look at the Advernet case here.

"Wojtczak testified that the Getty Images Contributor Agreement did “not have signatures. It is a digitally accepted agreement. The contributor signed via our online contributor contract portal.” The following ensued:

THE COURT: And where, if anywhere, does a representative form Getty execute, sign the document, digitally or otherwise?

THE WITNESS: You know, I'm not entirely familiar with where in the process that happens"..... OOPS! so much for "well represented and efficient organization"

"extracting damages" - I find it amusing that Timothy B. McCormack doesn't like us using the term "extortion" yet he states that Getty and their copyright trolls are efficient at "extracting damages...So here's our English lesson for the day.. from thesaurus.com:

Main Entry:   extort  [ik-stawrt] 
Part of Speech:   verb
Definition:   cheat; blackmail
Synonyms:   bleed, bully, clip, coerce, demand, educe, elicit, evince, exact, extract, fleece, force, get, gouge, hold up, ice*, make pay through nose, milk, obtain, pinch, pull one's leg, put screws to, put the arm on, secure, shake down, skin*, soak, squeeze, stick, sting, wrench, wrest, wring

Yes they "know copyright law inside and out", simply because they are mostly college interns, who drink the company kool-aid and are very efficient at reading from a canned script..same lines of BS different "clerks"

"Professional and easy to work with" - let us refer back to one of Timothy b McCormacks' letter for a minute....

"You have copied and used these images without a valid license."
"YOUR COMPANY HAS COMMITTED COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT"
"your comapny is a direct infringer...."
"this agreement shall be kept in confidence by the parties."
"Why Your Company's actions are illegal"
"... your company, its officers, and other individuals involved in the infringement are liable..."

Looks professional to me! And he wonders why someone would entertain filing a complaint with the Washington State Bar Association?

"For every action..there is a reaction"
"When you point a finger at someone else, you have three pointing back at you."

Wishing you all a fantastic McCormack Monday!

[Mulligan]

Great post, Buddhapi!

[stinger]

Well said!  Now if we can only figure out how to link your post to his blog so people who only see his blog can have a bit of the view from the other side of the fence.

[Matthew Chan]

McCormack is allowed to put out his propaganda.  WE are certainly providing a counter-point.

And for anyone curious, McCormack supposedly has at least 6 state bar complaints against him regarding his extortion letters. Many don't get one state bar complaint in their ENTIRE CAREERS!  That is a lot of complaints in a short amount of time. But as we have said, Karma is a real bitch.  (Speaking of bitches, I hear McCormack's paralegal is a real class act too. Anyone have her name?)

McCormack might be the first collections attorney that we know of who has gotten his state bar record dinged by his extortion letter campaign. As far as I am concerned, he deserved it for his outrageous letter.

We are noticing that more "extortion" letters really aren't extortion letters as they used to be. They are slowly becoming more civil, gentle, and truthful.

It looks like people like the idea and see the wisdom of fighting back against a lawyer who goes too far. Whoever those 6 people were, good job! As I predicted, the impact would be stunning and disorienting. Even I am amazed how quickly changes in extortion letters are being made by the various collection attorneys.

However, I suspect the ELI website is considered mandatory reading nowadays and the smart ones don't need to get their state bar records dinged to "get it".

I am not sure how many Attorney General complaints have been filed against McCormack. I haven't checked but maybe someone can make a phone call and report back to me since it is supposed to be public knowledge. 

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I'll take a stab at the name, perhaps it is Lauren Kingston, she's listed on Mr Rogers' Timothy B McCormacks website as an attorney and is also an ex employee of getty Images..how convenient is that...they are both sleeping in the same bed now!

And as usual when you dangle out a carrot like that I'm always the first to bite..guess I'll be calling the Washington Attorney General..

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Called and sent off the proper form, requesting any complaints that may have been filed with the Wash. A.G.

Someone owes me lunch!

[SoylentGreen]

McCormack can't convincingly say that he believes that "Getty's copyright" has been violated.
He needs to stop alledging "copyright infringement" in his demand letters immediately unless he has documentation on hand that proves such.
Additionally, he needs to supply proof of such infringement claims when the alleged infringer demands it.
Otherwise, I'm sure that there will be many more complaints against him and his firm.

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/5675/successkidgettymccormac.jpg

S.G.

[Peeved]

McCormack can't convincing say that he believes that "Getty's copyright" has been violated.
He needs to stop alledging "copyright infringement" in his demand letters immediately unless he has documentation on hand that proves such.
Additionally, he needs to supply proof of such infringement claims when the alleged infringer demands it.
Otherwise, I'm sure that there will be many more complaints against him and his firm.

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/5675/successkidgettymccormac.jpg

S.G.

"YOUR COMPANY HAS COMMITTED COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT"

YEEEEEP....Judge & Jury!

Love the image Soylent!
 

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

Great post buddhapi, while the extortion letters settlement demand letters do seem to be becoming more civil some are still using the rough stuff.  Carolyn E. Wright’s 35k demand letter states “The infringement is clear: and the only question is the amount of damages to be paid.”  I’m sorry. I didn’t realize that this had already gone to trial and a judgment was rendered.  This is just the same McCormick crap rehashed all over again. 

You referred to the Getty V. Advernet trial where it was shown that Getty’s images were not registered properly.  I know that Advernet had to default in this case but if they had not would they have been able to go after Getty for suing over images that did not have the right to sue over?

[Matthew Chan]

I agree with the comment on Photo Attorney Carolyn Wright and her extortion letters.  Carolyn and her co-horts have largely stayed below the radar until now. For some reason, we have recently gotten a sudden rush of submissions and cases coming our way.

They are now famous for the $35,000 for 2 images deal.

Having said that, the Photo Attorney letters are a bit more toned down from the McCormack letters but it is still pretty nasty and I could tear into them pretty well if I had time. I could definitely make a case that the Photo Attorney Letter is egregious enough to warrant a state bar complaint if I were to receive one.

[Peeved]

Called and sent off the proper form, requesting any complaints that may have been filed with the Wash. A.G.

Just wanted to add some links:

https://fortress.wa.gov/atg/formhandler/ago/ComplaintForm.aspx

http://www.wsba.org/Licensing%20and%20Lawyer%20Conduct/Discipline/File%20a%20Complaint%20Against%20a%20Lawyer

http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=28074

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

Thanks for the links Peeved.

Question for the group. 

Since I have asked GI to provide proof they have the rights to the image (signed contracts), how they came up with the amount they are asking for, past sales history etc.  They refused and basically told me go to their website and view the image there and that is all the proof I need. I have sent a letter now telling them we have nothing more to discuss until they can provide me the proof I have reasonably requested.  When GI replies, as I'm sure they will, still demanding payment without providing proof, would it be appropriate at that point to file a complaint with the AG office for trying to extort money from me by claiming I owe money and refusing to provide proof requested?

[Matthew Chan]

Good question.

Keep in mind that anyone can make a complaint against anyone for any reason. However, I don't believe in making frivolous complaints or making complaints that don't hold water.

I think it is quite legitimate to complain about someone that comes after you for money but don't explain how they arrived at those numbers. That is something Oscar and I have loudly complained about and fought against since the very beginning.

The true reason is that regardless of Getty's public statements and position, is that they are serving as their own judge and jury. The actual "executioner" part is dependent on how the letter recipient responds. Further, they don't look to recover what they "lost". They for far and away beyond that by using a "multiplier" system to serve as punitive measure and a business revenue generation system. Their extortion system is not simply loss recovery, it is a profit center all to itself.

I do collections but NEVER is it a profit center because you never come out ahead with the time, money, and aggravation lost. We always lose something even if we get lucky in a "complete" collection effort. I can get back court costs, lawyer costs (if any), a little bit of interest, plus my actual debt amount but most of us in business cannot mark up the actual debt.

In a similar fashion, Getty never goes by actual "market value" since most image values have nearly hit bottom. They now use a jacked up value that is artificially inflated by their tinkering of their website. The image I allegedly infringed upon was priced at $49 four years ago by Getty Images themselves, today that same image has been jacked up to $500-$600 range for a minimal, low-resolution, limited-time, web-based use. "Coincidentally" that was the "final" settlement offer made to me which I promptly declined.

Even judges have difficulty with ruling with "arbitrary" numbers even if there is legitimate infringement. Judges want to tie monetary awards to some degree of reality and justification, not a random number that makes no sense.

In my view, if I had to do it all over again, there would be no question I would have a filed a complaint listing the issues I brought up to AG. Their ongoing refusal to provide information but they happily stick their hands out to receive money. Remember, AG complaints are public record whether the AG chooses to agree with its merits.  Anyone who wants to download a list of complaints on Getty Images will see the written complaint on file.

The AG works on technicalities. Any member of the general public or press reading those complaints would know better and not bound by legal technicalities in their judgment or reading. They would be educated in the extortion business that Getty Images and CEO Jonathan Klein endorses.

Bottom line, given my list of complaints against them, it is absolutely appropriate to file a complaint with the AG if someone is inclined to. Ultimately, it is up to you to decide if you have been "wronged enough". Let us know what you decide.

Question for the group. 

Since I have asked GI to provide proof they have the rights to the image (signed contracts), how they came up with the amount they are asking for, past sales history etc.  They refused and basically told me go to their website and view the image there and that is all the proof I need. I have sent a letter now telling them we have nothing more to discuss until they can provide me the proof I have reasonably requested.  When GI replies, as I'm sure they will, still demanding payment without providing proof, would it be appropriate at that point to file a complaint with the AG office for trying to extort money from me by claiming I owe money and refusing to provide proof requested?

[SoylentGreen]

I like your well-balanced post, Matt.

Naturally, I think that when one receives a demand letter, he/she should request proof of the claim.
Anyone can send "threatening letters" demanding money, so it's prudent to do so.
Should a request for proof be denied, and further aggressive efforts are made to collect, then it's time to take action.

Perhaps, in the interest of fairness, one could notify the attorney in question that a complaint will be made in the event that futher action is taken without any proof of an actual copyright infringement.
If the attorney continues to pursue the claim, then a complaint should be made.

I'm honestly not sure where Getty will go from here.
Surely some will pay regardless, but the percentage is surely falling rapidly.
When somebody tries to shake you down for a large sum, and they don't offer ANY proof, they're essentially giving you an excuse to ignore the claim.

S.G.

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

I sent my reply to them telling them we have nothing to talk about until you provide all the proof I have asked for.  I have decided if the letter comes back and they say I still owe the money and have not provided any proof I will file a complaint with the Washington AG and with the Ohio AG (where I am) at since they are sending me the letters here. I will keep everyone posted.  Thank you all for your help and advice.

Good question.

Keep in mind that anyone can make a complaint against anyone for any reason. However, I don't believe in making frivolous complaints or making complaints that don't hold water.

I think it is quite legitimate to complain about someone that comes after you for money but don't explain how they arrived at those numbers. That is something Oscar and I have loudly complained about and fought against since the very beginning.

The true reason is that regardless of Getty's public statements and position, is that they are serving as their own judge and jury. The actual "executioner" part is dependent on how the letter recipient responds. Further, they don't look to recover what they "lost". They for far and away beyond that by using a "multiplier" system to serve as punitive measure and a business revenue generation system. Their extortion system is not simply loss recovery, it is a profit center all to itself.

I do collections but NEVER is it a profit center because you never come out ahead with the time, money, and aggravation lost. We always lose something even if we get lucky in a "complete" collection effort. I can get back court costs, lawyer costs (if any), a little bit of interest, plus my actual debt amount but most of us in business cannot mark up the actual debt.

In a similar fashion, Getty never goes by actual "market value" since most image values have nearly hit bottom. They now use a jacked up value that is artificially inflated by their tinkering of their website. The image I allegedly infringed upon was priced at $49 four years ago by Getty Images themselves, today that same image has been jacked up to $500-$600 range for a minimal, low-resolution, limited-time, web-based use. "Coincidentally" that was the "final" settlement offer made to me which I promptly declined.

Even judges have difficulty with ruling with "arbitrary" numbers even if there is legitimate infringement. Judges want to tie monetary awards to some degree of reality and justification, not a random number that makes no sense.

In my view, if I had to do it all over again, there would be no question I would have a filed a complaint listing the issues I brought up to AG. Their ongoing refusal to provide information but they happily stick their hands out to receive money. Remember, AG complaints are public record whether the AG chooses to agree with its merits.  Anyone who wants to download a list of complaints on Getty Images will see the written complaint on file.

The AG works on technicalities. Any member of the general public or press reading those complaints would know better and not bound by legal technicalities in their judgment or reading. They would be educated in the extortion business that Getty Images and CEO Jonathan Klein endorses.

Bottom line, given my list of complaints against them, it is absolutely appropriate to file a complaint with the AG if someone is inclined to. Ultimately, it is up to you to decide if you have been "wronged enough". Let us know what you decide.

Question for the group. 

Since I have asked GI to provide proof they have the rights to the image (signed contracts), how they came up with the amount they are asking for, past sales history etc.  They refused and basically told me go to their website and view the image there and that is all the proof I need. I have sent a letter now telling them we have nothing more to discuss until they can provide me the proof I have reasonably requested.  When GI replies, as I'm sure they will, still demanding payment without providing proof, would it be appropriate at that point to file a complaint with the AG office for trying to extort money from me by claiming I owe money and refusing to provide proof requested?