ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: gotletter on July 19, 2013, 03:36:49 PM
-
I won't bore you with the story; it's pretty much the same as everyone else here who has received a letter from getty.
I will state, however, that the template I purchased included the image that getty is alleging that I am infringing upon.
I got the letter two days ago; to cover all bases I removed the image that same day (I acutally pulled the entire website down because I had planned to redo the entire site this weekend anyways).
It is not a commercial site; it's just a "for fun hobby" site (in other words I'm not selling anything).
I do have bank records that show I paid for the template back in 2010, as well as an invoice from the company I purchased the template from. Sadly, it's just a generic invoice; Website Template is what it shows that I purchased.
I went to: http://www.copyright.gov/records/ and did a search for the individual that they claim is the copyright owner of the image; that person has never registered anything (at least not in the United States).
My next step is to write back to getty requesting proof that they indeed own the copyright to the image (which I suspect they don't from all the reading I've done on this site), or at the very least that they can prove that they have a legal claim to the image. I've found the person who's name is listed as having credit for the image, but there is nothing on his website to indicate that this image is indeed his.
I'll take any advice on the subject, but would like to ask this; is it wiser to send an email or a snail mail to getty?
-
I always used regular mail as I wanted a written record of everything that was said. What company did you get your template from? If it was template monster than you should be okay as Template Monster settled with Getty directly. Read up and educate yourself before sending any reply.
-
I always got all of my templates from boxedart(dot)com . I did a search on there and have not been able to find the template (which is not surprising, I mean this was back in 2010).
However, with that said.. I did just read on their site:
"(boxedart) give no rights or warranties with regard to the use of names, trademarks, registered or copyrighted designs, registered or copyrighted images, elements or works of art depicted or cont
ained in any image in any Product, and You must satisfy yourself that all the necessary rights or consents, as may be required for Your use of Product(s), are obtained."
Stupid me for thinking all I had to do was pay for something and I could use it.
I mean.. with something like this.. what's to stop Polo shirts from making a lawsuit against everyone who has purchased one of their shirts with their logo on it?
As a result, I am trying to familiarize myself with all things copyright now.
In reading I have come across this:
"§ 504. Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits
(a) In General. — Except as otherwise provided by this title, an infringer of copyright is liable for either —
(1) the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or
(2) statutory damages, as provided by subsection (c).
(b) Actual Damages and Profits. — The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work."
Would this mean that the copyright owner has to prove MY gross revenue on the image's use (in my case it's $0 because I just don't sell anything on that page let alone on the site itself), while I have to prove MY deductible expenses (which would be $15.00 a month for hosting plus $15.00 a year for registration) ? AND seeing as the supposed copyright owner does not appear to have registered the image for copyright, how does getty have a leg to stand on? Or is the above section not applicable in this instance?
-
Getty will even sell you an "insurance policy" for the images you get from them, it's listed in a brochure called "Be Sure of It" ;D
-
I have half the mind to write a simple and direct letter.
something along the lines of..
"While I have been able to show that I have in fact paid for the image from a template website, I am still going to exercise caution and have removed the image in question from my website and server. I am not admitting to liability by doing this, but rather I am removing it to further remove any ties to your company or website. I did look up the copyright for said offending image and was unable to verify that Getty Images, or the photographer you stated, was the copyright owner.
I have proof that i paid for said image, but I have yet to see proof that Getty Images has a legal claim to the image.
As the time restraint was placed upon me, I will also expect a reply within 7 business days providing to me explicit proof that Getty Images has a legal claim to the image and exclusive rights to the image. As I mentioned I have proof of payment to another website where I purchased a website template that contained the image in question. Should you not reply with the requested information within the same time frame you have granted me (7 business days), I will consider your demand(s) fully satisfied and this alleged infringement matter settled."
I already know their reply; it will be along the lines of:
[you still owe us, and we are not going to release the information you requested unless ordered by a judge in court. by the way, who us your proof.]
To which I'll simply tell them; my proof will be seen in court, take me there.
Thoughts?
-
on a related note.. does anyone know of a site I can go to to ask about some specific copyright questions? I'm learning more than I ever wanted to know (which is not a bad thing really), but I have a few questions that I just can't seem to find an answer for.
-
i think boxed art is owned by template monster...I would dump it in their lap, before wasting your own time with this..If the image was part of the template, then they should step up to the plate...abd getty is well aware of this, as there was a sttlement between them and templatemonster..
-
in my myriad of web page readings i swear up and down that i read that getty sells images to template monster.. and if boxedart is owned by tm... I also just read somewhere that TM has settled cases between a template purchaser and getty where TM's template allegedly contained a getty image.
so.. who knows. I'm still in shock from my letter. looks like I'm gonna take it to the mattresses.
-
getty sued TM and they settled, and TM does take care of clients that get letters..
I don't know of any site where you can ask copyright related questions, but I would here, Oscar does pop in from time to time, and he has given us many free IP law related lessons, and we also have some pretty minds here in the forum..ask away, worst case is we don't know and we all learn.
-
...and we also have some pretty minds here in the forum...
Peeved, Robert's talking about you again!
-
...and we also have some pretty minds here in the forum...
Peeved, Robert's talking about you again!
hehehe...good catch! was supposed to read "pretty GOOD minds" but pretty minds works too!
-
Getty will even sell you an "insurance policy" for the images you get from them, it's listed in a brochure called "Be Sure of It" ;D
Still funny btw!
-
I know it makes me chuckle, but might not be a bad idea as often as Getty is sued for selling images that are not theirs.
Getty will even sell you an "insurance policy" for the images you get from them, it's listed in a brochure called "Be Sure of It" ;D
Still funny btw!
-
In a worst-case scenario and getty does take me to court, where would that take place?
would I be required to travel to their home state, or would it take place in mine?
Can anyone provide any potential details on this?
-
It should be held in your District Court.
In a worst-case scenario and getty does take me to court, where would that take place?
would I be required to travel to their home state, or would it take place in mine?
Can anyone provide any potential details on this?
-
It should be held in your District Court.
In a worst-case scenario and getty does take me to court, where would that take place?
would I be required to travel to their home state, or would it take place in mine?
Can anyone provide any potential details on this?
Which adds to the amount they would need to spend, and possibly not recoup if they were to loose...thus making the chances of them picking you out of hundreds or maybe even thousands of other recipients even lower.
-
I sent my reply to them via cert. snail mail. I'll let you know what happens.
-
Thanks!
I sent my reply to them via cert. snail mail. I'll let you know what happens.
-
Despite my sending them a certified letter they responded to me today with an email. Form letter blah blah blah; they don't consider the matter closed even tho I provided documentation that shows I paid for the template (that included said image) a few years back. They claim it's not enough proof and I still need to pay them.
I sent a 1 line reply stating I provided proof and I consider the matter closed.
I'm sure they will reply again. I'll simply reply with the exact same reply I just did, and I'll reply each and every time with the exact same thing.
-
as good a plan as any..remember it's not up to you to prove anything, it's on those ass wipes at Getty to prove you did not purchase it, they pulled the same shit with me.
-
On the next letter received from them I would file complaints with the Washington State Attorney General, the Washington State BBB, the Federal Trade Commission, Your Congressman and Senator and if you hear anything from Mr. McCormack the same for him as well as the Washington, Oregon and Idaho State Bar Associations.
I love how even when proof is provided it is never quite enough or good enough. I think this is Getty's motto when it comes to the pursuit of their "Business Model"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03s
-
I love how even when proof is provided it is never quite enough or good enough. I think this is Getty's motto when it comes to the pursuit of their "Business Model"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03s
That is such a good fit Greg.
-
Thanks ;)
I love how even when proof is provided it is never quite enough or good enough. I think this is Getty's motto when it comes to the pursuit of their "Business Model"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03s
That is such a good fit Greg.
-
I would cease all communication with them if they do not directly address your last latter or come back with their boilerplate response. But you are likely heading into Tim McCormack territory soon.
-
Today I got.. well.. a reply on my blog from NCS.
Now.. I've got by blog set up in such a way that new posts are not published until I approve them.
Strange thing is, it's a different case number than what getty provided.
No, it will never grace the pages of my blog, their reply.
However, what is to stop them from posting on my google+ page or on my myspace page?
-
Today I got.. well.. a reply on my blog from NCS.
Now.. I've got by blog set up in such a way that new posts are not published until I approve them.
Strange thing is, it's a different case number than what getty provided.
No, it will never grace the pages of my blog, their reply.
However, what is to stop them from posting on my google+ page or on my myspace page?
NCS actually left a comment on your blog? You must be kidding! I would be contactng them directly and speaking to a "supervisor"...whomever left a comment should be out of a job.
-
it has IP address, email info, all kinds of "fun" information.
-
it has IP address, email info, all kinds of "fun" information.
all the more reason to share it publicly..we all like to have fun!
-
Did you send them a letter letting them know this is a claim and not a debt? IF not do so right away and let them know any further contact will result in a complaint to the FTC and AG's offices. If you have sent them the letter I would be filing complaints on them by the end of the day.
-
GotLetter, please follow Greg's advice. And after you notify NCS that this is a claim, if they contact you in ANY WAY, it would be time to "make it rain." And by that I mean a downpour of letters to your DA, AG, Senators, Rep., anybody that might have an interest in crooked collections schemes.
-
I've not replied to it, it's a post on my blog that they sent this "demand" to.. and at that, it's on a page that dates back several years.. I'm not even going to consider it legit, as.. it's a reply to a post on a blog.. it looks to me to be one of those "phishing / spam" replies. At least that's how I see it. My websites are registered, my actual name is on display as the registrant, as well as my physical address. They are welcome to contact me via mail.
Once that happens then oh yes, the letters will most certainly rain down.
The dumb part is.. all replies on my blog can be edited to say whatever I want them to say... So yeah, they can just send me a letter in the mail.
-
NCS left a second reply on my blog (this time under a different area).
-
I can't believe NCS has resorted to commenting on blogs in regards to trying to collect on a claim..surely there is a way to make this stop..either by blocking them from your site, or possibly reporting them..
-
I agree, if it were me I would be sending off a flurry of complaint letters about NCS as well as Getty for using them and approving of these tactics.
To me comment on a blog is equivalent to me coming to your workplace, mall, restaurant or any public place and shouting.
"I am looking for John Doe, I have been sent by Ted Smith who says you owe him money and he wants you to pay it.
Would you just sit there and take that or tell the guy to get lost?
I would be writing and mailing complaint letters so fast they wouldn't know what hit them...oh wait, I did and haven't heard a peep from Getty, NCS or McCormack for a year and a half now. ;)
Seriously though, I would consider filing complaints as this is totally inappropriate
-
Letters have already been drafted and are ready to mail out in the morning.
The very fact that I have already provided proof that I purchased said image is what is really pissing me off right now.
-
I would make the fact that you have already provided proof, the basis of your complaint letters.
If one steps back and looks at what is really going on here, it is easy to see that these guys are motivated by the money - not by correcting mis-appropriated copyright issues.
Unfortunately, the agencies we complain to tend not to look at things over a broad swath of time. They look at individual incidents and think that they are isolated mistakes rather than a carefully thought out plan to enrich the trolls.
The only way we can combat this is with a deluge of complaint letters so large that it would be impossible not to see the big picture.