From what I have read on these forums, the central defence against the getty letter goes like this:
a) The photographer owns the copyright on the image
b) Therefore ask to see proof of Gettys exclusive right to enforce copyright on behalf of the photographer
Is this correct?
If so, I wonder if the photographers know what getty are doing "on their behalf"? The name of the photographer that owns the copyright of the image we used was included in the letter, and I found myself wondering if he would support getty's action?
Is there any point in organising a campaign to make the photographers aware of what getty are doing, thereby causing them to have second thoughts about selling their images through them?
Just some idle thoughts - thanks for listening!
a) The photographer owns the copyright on the image
b) Therefore ask to see proof of Gettys exclusive right to enforce copyright on behalf of the photographer
Is this correct?
If so, I wonder if the photographers know what getty are doing "on their behalf"? The name of the photographer that owns the copyright of the image we used was included in the letter, and I found myself wondering if he would support getty's action?
Is there any point in organising a campaign to make the photographers aware of what getty are doing, thereby causing them to have second thoughts about selling their images through them?
Just some idle thoughts - thanks for listening!