ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: Elizabeth on February 27, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
-
Good morning,
Searched for this topic but found nothing. I reposted an image I was sent on Tumbler and of course I got a letter from Getty Images about unlicensed image use. $1065 seems a bit excessive as it was on my blog. Checked the license fees for that image and social media per each(ie: tumbler or facebook or etc) was $335. Not sure what my next move should be. Any thoughts by more experienced members? Thanks, Elizabeth
-
Certainly the amount requested is likely ridiculous as most demands are. That said, there are a few issues that could make the issue go away 100% and very quickly:
Did you upload the image to tumbler? Or did you hotlink?
If you hotlinked (as many do on tumbler) and you are in the US, there is zero infringement no matter what the image is, where you got it an so on. So, let's resolve that first.
BTW: Do not write to Getty yet. Do not volunteer *anything* to your detriment. That is do not try to "explain" how you got the image and so on. Quite often, Getty has practically no evidence.
(I'm wondering how they identified you as the owner of the tumbler blog. But presumably they did.)
-
I did hotlink the image back to a now deleted blog. perhaps they were on Gettys radar. Thanks, elizabeth
-
Perhaps I should say that I reblogged the image, which is like retweeting on Twitter. I was not the original post, I only shared the post on my Tumblr blog. The original site was on the post. If someone clicked on my blog post it would take them to the original blog post.
-
If the image in question was through a hot link even in a re-blog there is no infringement. Just tell Getty that the image was not displayed but hotlinked which is legal in if they have any questions to look up Google vs Perfect 10 for reference but they are well aware of it. I would tell them that you consider the matter closed at this point and not to contact you again or you will file complaint letters against them with the Washington state Attorney General's office, the BBB, the FTC and other agencies.
Do not include the last part about the complaint letters in less you fully intend to do it as if you make the statement and do not intend to do it or follow through with it they will see that and continue to hound you.
Good luck and please keep us posted as to your progress.
-
Perhaps I should say that I reblogged the image, which is like retweeting on Twitter. I was not the original post, I only shared the post on my Tumblr blog. The original site was on the post. If someone clicked on my blog post it would take them to the original blog post.
I'm not familiar with the mechanics on Tumblr. But if your action did not create a fresh copy on anyone's server, but only posted a hyperlink you did not copy under use copyright law. Or at least -- that's what the ninth circuit says. When you write back cite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com,_Inc. Unless they come back showing a hyperlink on a server you control well.. you they have no evidence you copied as that term is defined under use copyright law (and likely you didn't.)
If they write saying that the law covers displaying too-- quote the exact same case. Hotlinking is not displaying a copy under *US copyright law*-- not even if Getty would like you to believe that the words sound like it might be.
-
Do not engage them in any further conversation after that - while your specific issue may not have been discussed in a separate forum, it really isn't new as we have discussed hotlinking and and there is lots of info on the Getty program in general. Good luck!