One of the reasons I refuse to give in to the ridiculous demands of Getty is that they have lost a lawsuit brought by a photographer because they distributed his photographs without his permission.
http://petapixel.com/2013/11/23/daniel-morel-awarded-1-2m-damages-law-suit-afp-getty-images/
Because of this situation I would think that Getty would need to provide proof that they owned the rights to image at the time of the supposed infringement. Would this seem reasonable in court?
Also, is anyone aware of any other lawsuits similar to the Daniel Morel case?? If so please post.
http://petapixel.com/2013/11/23/daniel-morel-awarded-1-2m-damages-law-suit-afp-getty-images/
Because of this situation I would think that Getty would need to provide proof that they owned the rights to image at the time of the supposed infringement. Would this seem reasonable in court?
Also, is anyone aware of any other lawsuits similar to the Daniel Morel case?? If so please post.