ExtortionLetterInfo Forums

ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: mreams on March 25, 2012, 03:34:51 AM

Title: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on March 25, 2012, 03:34:51 AM
First off thank you for this site.  I just made a $10 donation :)  I have read many posts and watched videos for about 5 hours!

I have a business I am starting and registered businessname.com and called my business "businessname"  It is not an actual legal or registered business, it is just a name I used.  I do own the domain.  The letter I got was addressed to Legal Dept: Businessname.   So my question is since "Businessname" doesn't even really exist does that matter?  Or because I own the domain it matters?  They want $1040 US for 1 small 1 inch square image that has been on my site for 3 months!!!

Anyway here is my plan:

Reply to Getty stating that telling them I have taken the images down immediately upon receipt of the settlement demand letter (I did do this) and apologize for an inconvenience.  Mention that I obtained the image from a third part and did not know it had a copyright.  I will mention that my website has made zero profit thus zero profit from the use of the image.  I will show 3 sites with similar images ranging from $5 to $25 for 1 year use.  I will enclose a check for $50 to close out the matter.  I will write in the memo section of the check "full payment for settlement (claim number)"

When they respond asking for a full payment, and I am sure they will, I will ask for proof of:
1 - Copyright of the image in question
2 - signed paperwork of the artist transferring copyright paperwork to Getty
3 - The exact formula they used to come up with the settlement demand
4 - Sales records of that image at that price or any price
5 - Exact day that the infringement started.

I am sure they will respond again and demand payment.  I will use Matthew Chan's letter on Scribed as a guide for my reply.  I will basically call them out on how unprofessional they are and that this is extortion etc.  I will NOT pay more than $50, and I will tell them that.

If they give the file to a collection agency I will tell the collection agency that this is NOT a debt but a settlement claim that I have not agreed to pay and I will NOT pay. I will tell the collection agency that I will file a complaint against them with the proper authorities for harassment if they continue to contact me.  I will block there number and not respond to emails etc.If they end up taking me to court good luck to them.  First off I am in Canada and I don't think they will bother with me.  If they do no judge in their right mind would award the outrageous amount they want.


Any thoughts anyone?

Matt
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on March 25, 2012, 12:13:11 PM
Welcome to the forum! Glad to see you've done some homework, you're on the right track in your plan and thinking.. Generally speaking Getty goes after the domain owner, doesn't matter if it a business a personal site, or a charity...rest assured your 50.00 check will be returned. I'm not sure NCS can even contact you, if you are in Canada, but if they could I would not block there calls/emails, I would keep a record of every instance, also keep a record of Getty not accepting your fair offer. You might consider getting screen captures of the other similar images and their pricing, just to have in case.. I highly doubt it will go to court, but one never knows.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on March 25, 2012, 12:40:13 PM
Avoid any apologies or admission of guilt when dealing with matters that might be of a legal nature.
Apologies or admissions may be intended to express "goodwill", however it's really irrelevant.
They've already determined that you're responsible and they just want money.

I'm always concerned that such admissions may close future avenues of success to the alleged infringer, and open new avenues legally to that of the stock image company.
Mistakes do happen, evidence gets lost, and loopholes are sometimes found that exonerate a alleged infringer.
But, once you admit guilt, you may destroy any future hope of this.

It may not seem like a big deal for a 1000 dollars.  But, there are big claims being made in some cases, and it's best to be very careful.

If you decide to settle, it's best to simply offer a settlement, "admitting no guilt or wrongdoing, but offering a settlement to close the matter".

S.G.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on March 26, 2012, 05:22:15 AM
SoylentGreen


You do make a good point.  But the fact is they have a screenshot of the image on my site.  So I am guilty, no way around it.  I appreciate your input and might just offer a settlement "admitting no guilt or wrongdoing, but offering a settlement to close the matter". as you suggest with no apology etc.  Then if they deny put my steps above into action.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on March 26, 2012, 09:53:32 AM
It's important to remember that, while they may have a screenshot as "proof" of the alleged infringement, that does not necessarily mean they they own (or own the rights to) the image in question.

A signed statement that essentially says "sorry that I infringed against your copyrighted material", might assume some liability on your part that you may not otherwise have.

Imagine working for a taxi service or trucking company.
Such companies make it quite clear that the driver is not to admit "fault" in the event of an accident, even though the front end of a car may be ripped off.

It's simply for "liability" purposes.  I'd like to see more people be careful with the "apology" thing in legal matters.
But, yes, it's just my opinion.

S.G.


Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Mulligan on March 26, 2012, 10:32:07 AM
I'd like to see just how a blurry PicScout screenshot would hold up in court as proof of anything.

If Getty ever took me to court, I'd want to uncover everything there is to know about PicScout. I'd take great pleasure in throwing some light on that highly questionable and deeply dark operation.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Matthew Chan on March 26, 2012, 03:05:39 PM
This has been discussed before so I won't get into a lengthy post. An "apology" is not always an admission of guilt. It depends on the phrasing. In circumstances where you are very likely to be in a losing position on a single point (the screen shot of your web page for example), an apology looks way better than saying "nope that is not my screen shot" and making them "work" for it.

There is a live Hollywood extortion case I am covering where the defendant at around $350/hour is "fighting it every step of the way" and bleeding to death financially on a technicality vs. conceding the point and moving forward to the central allegation.  There is a real possibility he will be broke before the case advances to the next step.

FWIW, Oscar and I have discussed this at length. Unless you are deep-pocketed, sometimes it is best to to concede a minor point and move the case along to a resolution.

Obviously, if they ENTIRELY made a mistake and it is not your website, then offer no apology. But on the rare chance, a case goes to court, you could be called to testify. And if you are caught perjuring (that is criminal offense), you will wish that you only had the infringement case to deal with.

Remember, these letters you write can work for you or against you.  I believe in congruency all the way from written letters to live testimony.  Your credibility is much higher.

I am NOT saying to apologize on everything or absolutely nothing. What I am saying that an apology can actually be a helpful tool if used correctly.  I have used the apology strategy many times in life including in court. Some think it takes power AWAY from you. Many times, it BESTOWS more power to you because it helps defuse a point.   It depends on how it is used.

For example, don't say "I apologize that I am a copyright infringer".  But you might say, "I apologize for the inconvenience this is causing you and your company" or "I apologize that this entire incident and dispute has occurred" or "I apologize that my web designer used your photos without my knowledge and permission."  "I apologize for unknowingly buying a template that had infringing images." (Innocent infringement).

Some examples of using "regret" in a strategic way:
"I regret that you and I cannot seem to agree on this". "I regret that you will not accept my reasonable settlement offer which is based on true market value, not an inflated one." "I regret you will not provide me the information I requested to make an informed decision".

I could use "I apologize" and "I regret" all day long to make the the other guy look bad and concede minor points. 

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on March 26, 2012, 03:36:35 PM
Matt, we're in agreement here, I think.

Of course, I'm not implying in any way that people should "fight it every step of the way", and lose out in the end.
I should reiterate that one should not make things "worse" by going straight to implying that oneself is "guilty".
Now, I'm simply saying saying, "don't admit guilt".  I'm not saying deny everything, unless something is in fact untrue.
Many people aren't that articulate, and that's the danger.

I'd also like to say that one should be professional, etc.  But don't appear to be the "softest target out there".
Because such a person will be the first in line if there's a lawsuit.
Not that many lawsuits have historically occurred.

Just my opinion, but I do think that we're on the same page here, even if we word it slightly differently.

S.G.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Matthew Chan on March 26, 2012, 04:06:41 PM
Good points made here.  I definitely agree with "Don't be the softest target."  Definitely agree on deny where it absolutely needs to be denied. But don't deny in areas where it makes you look like an idiot.

I most definitely agree that many people aren't that articulate but everyone needs to start learning at some point.

I know people are clamoring for "form letters" to make things easier. I get a bit concerned when people say they will follow my letters as a template. That wasn't the intent and those letters are 4 years old. Although I stand by my letters, the letters I would write today would be far different and a bit shorter given what I know today.

I won't say I won't eventually create some but I am very resistant to it because I think using form letter takes away from the message plus you can't have form letters for every permutation of circumstance.

I would say most of us agree on more points than disagree, otherwise there would more online slugfests. LOL.

Matt, we're in agreement here, I think.

Of course, I'm not implying in any way that people should "fight it every step of the way", and lose out in the end.
I should reiterate that one should not make things "worse" by going straight to implying that oneself is "guilty".
Now, I'm simply saying saying, "don't admit guilt".  I'm not saying deny everything, unless something is in fact untrue.
Many people aren't that articulate, and that's the danger.

I'd also like to say that one should be professional, etc.  But don't appear to be the "softest target out there".
Because such a person will be the first in line if there's a lawsuit.
Not that many lawsuits have historically occurred.

Just my opinion, but I do think that we're on the same page here, even if we word it slightly differently.

S.G.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Jerry Witt (mcfilms) on March 29, 2012, 01:04:45 PM
I also think it is a mistake to assume anything. GI may send you a "blurry PicScout screenshot" as proof of their claim. But to assume that they don't have multiple crystal clear shots is a huge mistake. I know if I were pursuing this I would gather as much supporting proof as possible.

I also think it's foolish to assume that the date of their letter is the date of their discovery. I'm certain there is a period of days, if not weeks or months that pass before they send out a notice. To outright lie about this information is just going to make you look like a jerk. You know when you put it up. Of course I'm not saying you should volunteer the exact date you uploaded the image in early conversations.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on March 29, 2012, 02:21:10 PM
I also think it is a mistake to assume anything. GI may send you a "blurry PicScout screenshot" as proof of their claim. But to assume that they don't have multiple crystal clear shots is a huge mistake. I know if I were pursuing this I would gather as much supporting proof as possible.

I also think it's foolish to assume that the date of their letter is the date of their discovery. I'm certain there is a period of days, if not weeks or months that pass before they send out a notice. To outright lie about this information is just going to make you look like a jerk. You know when you put it up. Of course I'm not saying you should volunteer the exact date you uploaded the image in early conversations.

I'm doing some homework on any patterns as to when Getty and others send out letters, I've been noticing a trend, where the forums seem to get quiet, and then all of a sudden get busy again.. I can't help but think that Getty tends to send out letters on a monthly basis all in one shot. If anywould would like to volunteer when their letters were dated it would help in my research, I f a pattern emerges I'll have a look at how hawaiian art network operates as well..it might just be me, but in talking with Matt recently, we discussed the fact that it's usually quiet right before the storm.. This would lend credibility to the fact that you can't use the date of the letter as date of the infringement discovery.....Poor mail mail must hate to pick up Getty's mail on the dates in questions...if it pans out
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on March 29, 2012, 08:42:05 PM
Interesting thoughts, Buddhapi... I'm looking forward to your findings.

Also, the Masterfile/ Arius3d deadline comes up tomorrow...

S.G.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Matthew Chan on March 30, 2012, 12:54:29 PM
I've always been a bit uncertain using the letter date as the actual date of discovery myself. I have wondered how long it takes between actual discovery and generation of the letter. But using the letter date is fairly safe since it builds in an unknown amount of "cushion" to their actual discovery date.

I also think it's foolish to assume that the date of their letter is the date of their discovery. I'm certain there is a period of days, if not weeks or months that pass before they send out a notice.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: pea on April 11, 2012, 04:44:23 PM
Hi, I'm new here, but I think I can contribute to the question about using the date of the letter as date of infringement.  I recently received 'the extortion letter' for a an image that I had used on a paper flyer, which I had pdf'd and posted on my website (side question about that - does that still count as infringement under same rules as an image posted directly on webpage?).  They claim I owe them $875.

My letter is dated March 15, 2012, but I am certain that the image was not up at that time, as I had updated my website and removed it weeks before that.  In fact, after looking back at my calendar, I'm fairly certain that I removed the image the week of February 6th (I should be able to confirm that later).  So, it was potentially 5 weeks before the date of their letter.

Hope that's helpful to your research, and thanks to all of you who have contributed so much time and information!  I was completely in the dark about all of this and totally shocked when I received the letter. 

One last question, does anyone know if images on the Microsoft Office image database can be used without licensing?  They offer them freely for download, but maybe you still can't put them on your website?  Confused...thanks again for the help!
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Peeved on April 11, 2012, 06:36:07 PM
One last question, does anyone know if images on the Microsoft Office image database can be used without licensing?  They offer them freely for download, but maybe you still can't put them on your website?  Confused...thanks again for the help!

I always thought it was "ok" to use Microsoft images as well until I read the "terms of service".

Here is the website:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/images/??lc=en-us

Here is the "TOS" page:
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/IntellectualProperty/Copyright/Default.aspx#EEB


NOTE:

"PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL USE LIMITATION.
Unless otherwise specified, the Services are for your personal and non-commercial use. You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products or services obtained from the Services."



Am I the only one who is urked by this? You may use them all you want for "personal" use but don't you dare try to decorate your website where you sell stuff to try and put food on the table for your family! Err!

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 11, 2012, 07:26:39 PM

NOTE:

"PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL USE LIMITATION.
Unless otherwise specified, the Services are for your personal and non-commercial use. You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products or services obtained from the Services.

Am I the only one who is urked by this? You may use them all you want for "personal" use but don't you dare try to decorate your website where you sell stuff to try and put food on the table for your family! Err!

The images contained in Microsnots products are owned by Corbis, which is owned by Microsnot, so it's not very surprising..
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on April 12, 2012, 03:08:50 PM
I'm doing some homework on any patterns as to when Getty and others send out letters, I've been noticing a trend, where the forums seem to get quiet, and then all of a sudden get busy again.. I can't help but think that Getty tends to send out letters on a monthly basis all in one shot. If anywould would like to volunteer when their letters were dated it would help in my research, I f a pattern emerges I'll have a look at how hawaiian art network operates as well..it might just be me, but in talking with Matt recently, we discussed the fact that it's usually quiet right before the storm.. This would lend credibility to the fact that you can't use the date of the letter as date of the infringement discovery.....Poor mail mail must hate to pick up Getty's mail on the dates in questions...if it pans out

Like Pea my letter was also dated March 15th 2012.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on April 12, 2012, 03:18:22 PM
Like most people I am a pretty busy person.  When I actually had the time (April 5th, 1 week past the Getty deadline for a response) to check the rest of website. I took all my images and uploaded them up to a reverse image lookup site: http://www.tineye.com/ (This is a great site to check your images)  I found I had a total of 4 images that were in the Getty database,  Yikes!  Of course I took them all down and replaced them.

I actually never got around to reply to Getty.  There is a phone number on my website, but it is just a voice mail, no messages yet.  I have not received another letter yet either.  I think at this point I will do nothing unless I get another letter. 

Matt
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: pea on April 13, 2012, 05:31:44 PM
Thanks for the response, I'm going to guess that means don't use Microsoft Images.  So frustrating, why in the world do they make them so easy to download if they don't want you to use them???

Time to invest in a good camera...
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 13, 2012, 05:59:22 PM
Like most people I am a pretty busy person.  When I actually had the time (April 5th, 1 week past the Getty deadline for a response) to check the rest of website. I took all my images and uploaded them up to a reverse image lookup site: http://www.tineye.com/ (This is a great site to check your images)  I found I had a total of 4 images that were in the Getty database,  Yikes!  Of course I took them all down and replaced them.

I actually never got around to reply to Getty.  There is a phone number on my website, but it is just a voice mail, no messages yet.  I have not received another letter yet either.  I think at this point I will do nothing unless I get another letter. 

Matt

Do NOT depend solely on TinEye, it's not a slam dunk that it will find all images, and also don't forget Getty is not the only trolling company either.. Bottom line is if you have ANY images on your site of which you do not have a receipt for, or you did not create the image yourself, someone somewhere owns that / those images and you are still exposed to getting other or more letters.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on April 13, 2012, 06:16:17 PM
Do NOT depend solely on TinEye, it's not a slam dunk that it will find all images, and also don't forget Getty is not the only trolling company either.. Bottom line is if you have ANY images on your site of which you do not have a receipt for, or you did not create the image yourself, someone somewhere owns that / those images and you are still exposed to getting other or more letters.

You are correct.  I actuall used another site as well to check.  I had 1 image from some other Getty like site, I removed that one as well.  After looking at the images that are listed in these companies you get a good feel if you think it is an image that would be on Getty or a Getty like sight.  But I always check now. 
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 13, 2012, 06:25:28 PM

You are correct.  I actuall used another site as well to check.  I had 1 image from some other Getty like site, I removed that one as well.  After looking at the images that are listed in these companies you get a good feel if you think it is an image that would be on Getty or a Getty like sight.  But I always check now.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an ass hat, but I think you missed my main point.. just because one of these sites did not find an image, doesn't get you in the clear, the ONLY way to be 100% certain is to have paperwork or create the images yourself. I suggest you might read the hawaiian art network posts, in regards to "free" wallpaper images.. there are also single photographers that track back their images and send out nasty grams.. I guess it comes down to if you want to gamble or not. I have since stopped using images unless I create them.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Greg Troy (KeepFighting) on April 14, 2012, 10:32:58 AM
My Letter was dated March 29th.  I will be interested to see the results of this.

I also think it is a mistake to assume anything. GI may send you a "blurry PicScout screenshot" as proof of their claim. But to assume that they don't have multiple crystal clear shots is a huge mistake. I know if I were pursuing this I would gather as much supporting proof as possible.

I also think it's foolish to assume that the date of their letter is the date of their discovery. I'm certain there is a period of days, if not weeks or months that pass before they send out a notice. To outright lie about this information is just going to make you look like a jerk. You know when you put it up. Of course I'm not saying you should volunteer the exact date you uploaded the image in early conversations.

I'm doing some homework on any patterns as to when Getty and others send out letters, I've been noticing a trend, where the forums seem to get quiet, and then all of a sudden get busy again.. I can't help but think that Getty tends to send out letters on a monthly basis all in one shot. If anywould would like to volunteer when their letters were dated it would help in my research, I f a pattern emerges I'll have a look at how hawaiian art network operates as well..it might just be me, but in talking with Matt recently, we discussed the fact that it's usually quiet right before the storm.. This would lend credibility to the fact that you can't use the date of the letter as date of the infringement discovery.....Poor mail mail must hate to pick up Getty's mail on the dates in questions...if it pans out
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Lettered on April 14, 2012, 11:52:31 AM

You are correct.  I actuall used another site as well to check.  I had 1 image from some other Getty like site, I removed that one as well.  After looking at the images that are listed in these companies you get a good feel if you think it is an image that would be on Getty or a Getty like sight.  But I always check now.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an ass hat, but I think you missed my main point.. just because one of these sites did not find an image, doesn't get you in the clear, the ONLY way to be 100% certain is to have paperwork or create the images yourself. I suggest you might read the hawaiian art network posts, in regards to "free" wallpaper images.. there are also single photographers that track back their images and send out nasty grams.. I guess it comes down to if you want to gamble or not. I have since stopped using images unless I create them.

Well ... you can approach 100% certainty if you are careful, but I dont think you can ever be 100% certain.
I doubt Getty does much due dilegence to make sure their contributors are posting original material.  If someone sees their work on your website, they could come after you.  If one is taking comfort in the fact that you have Getty license receipts, then one should study the idemnity clauses in the license contract.  I think the sense of comfort would evaporate.
Not even taking your own pictures is 100% certain. There have been cases of people losing lawsuits in which their own photo (that they took themselves) looked too much like a Getty photo.  Here's a UK case I remembered:
http://www.epuk.org/News/233/getty-images-wins-plagiarism-appeal
I think you can even find some cases where photographers have gotten into trouble for photographing copyrighted works of art.

So, yes, if you are careful, taking your own photos is low risk in my opinion.  I don't think it's ever 100% certain though.

Copyright law is outdated, lobbied and legislated to the point of insanity, and in severe need of reform, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on April 14, 2012, 12:55:52 PM
There are way to many what ifs.  In the future I will check my images against the Getty database and check them with reverse image lookup sites, I might even take the odd picture myself.

I guess if you want to be 100% safe do nothing, never post anything on any website, and never leave home or get out of bed.  Of course I am being sarcastic but you can't let fear of a small chance something will happen stop you stop you from doing what you want.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Peeved on April 14, 2012, 04:34:41 PM
Ok for what it's worth.....

I can understand mreams frustration. I think the idea here is that if you are going to take the risk of using images not your own, your best option would be to indeed do those reverse searches and perhaps stick to some of the free sites on Mcfilms list posted in this forum. Obviously there are a lot of us here who no longer wish to take this risk.

I guess if you want to be 100% safe do nothing, never post anything on any website, and never leave home or get out of bed.  Of course I am being sarcastic but you can't let fear of a small chance something will happen stop you stop you from doing what you want.

I also can understand Lettered's point however, the risk of being sued for taking ones own photograph is something that I personally do not worry about. The example given in the UK case is pretty unusual. I don't think it would be the "norm" for most amateur photographers. I would have no issue going out and taking a photo of a couple kissing on a carousel and using it. I doubt seriously that it would look anything like the image in question. On that note however, when I first looked at the two photos in the UK case, my first thought was that it was BS, that the two photos were obviously NOT the same photo! I could see why the case went on for four years with an APPEAL!

Not even taking your own pictures is 100% certain. There have been cases of people losing lawsuits in which their own photo (that they took themselves) looked too much like a Getty photo.  Here's a UK case I remembered:
http://www.epuk.org/News/233/getty-images-wins-plagiarism-appeal
I think you can even find some cases where photographers have gotten into trouble for photographing copyrighted works of art.

I was curious about the UK case and the image involved. Here is the link to the image on Getty's site:

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/couple-kissing-on-merry-go-round-high-res-stock-photography/AB25725

Also interesting I searched the U.S. Copyright Website and found only 4 registrations for the photographer of this image. This photo does not appear to be included in the search by "name":

# Name (NALL) <  Full Title  Copyright Number  Date 
  [ 1 ]  Sanderson, Ian  [Payne Stewart commemorative print]  VA0001070949  2000 
  [ 2 ]  Sanderson, Ian  Payne Stewart commemorative print / VA 1-070-949.  V3521D420  2005 
  [ 3 ]  Sanderson, Ian Moffat  Ariane.  VA0001628288  2008 
  [ 4 ]  Sanderson, Ian R.  WALKER'S PEDIATRIC GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASE Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Management, Fifth Edition.  TX0007248959  2008 


Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 14, 2012, 05:36:10 PM

I'm doing some homework on any patterns as to when Getty and others send out letters, I've been noticing a trend, where the forums seem to get quiet, and then all of a sudden get busy again.. I can't help but think that Getty tends to send out letters on a monthly basis all in one shot. If anywould would like to volunteer when their letters were dated it would help in my research, I f a pattern emerges I'll have a look at how hawaiian art network operates as well..it might just be me, but in talking with Matt recently, we discussed the fact that it's usually quiet right before the storm.. This would lend credibility to the fact that you can't use the date of the letter as date of the infringement discovery.....Poor mail mail must hate to pick up Getty's mail on the dates in questions...if it pans out

So I've looked thru literally hundreds of posts going back several years, and also has some folks send me dates , the dates seems to be spread out all over, no obvious patterns, with the exception that some letter seems to "sit around" before actually getting mailed...

On another note has anybody noticed that Hawaiian Art Network has seemed to fall silent?
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Lettered on April 14, 2012, 08:53:44 PM
Peeved,  I do agree that under most circumstances using our own images is very low risk.  By the way here is an example of one that went the other way ... it is a US case that Getty won (in a big way) when they got sued for infringement. 
http://www.photosource.com/cpyright/cpysep04.html
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Peeved on April 14, 2012, 10:07:46 PM
Peeved,  I do agree that under most circumstances using our own images is very low risk.  By the way here is an example of one that went the other way ... it is a US case that Getty won (in a big way) when they got sued for infringement. 
http://www.photosource.com/cpyright/cpysep04.html

Personally I feel that the first judge in the (FNOTSI) case got it right when the judge ruled that "since the central concept being pictured – a couple kissing – could not itself be copyrighted, there was no case to answer." which Getty appealed. How NICE for Getty to come out smelling like a rose on BOTH sides of the coin though regarding the Penny Gentieu case! 

What is even more disturbing to me regarding the Penny Gentieu link that Lettered provided, are the OTHER cases on that page which show examples of images that courts have found to be substantially similar (NOT!), the Wheelchair for example! So don't anybody go taking any photographs of an empty wheelchair by a fence! UNREAL!

Thanks for the post Lettered! 
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on April 15, 2012, 12:30:22 AM
Anyone else recall that Getty was sued for imitating the work of one of it's former contributors who quit because Getty began paying less and less?
Getty won.  Kind of ironic.

"...the Judge granted Getty’s motion for attorneys’ fees in the amount of† $728.308.23 -- an extraordinary amount, especially given that there had been no trial and that it took nearly three years for Getty to acknowledge and pay over $100,000 in undisputed royalty fees.† What’s more, even though the appeal was fully briefed and oral argument was set for October, 2003, the Court ordered that the attorneys’ fee judgment be paid by September 12... Getty quickly sought to execute the judgment -- which would have happened before the appeal took place unless Gentieu was able to post a substantial bond (she wasn’t). Gentieu suddenly faced the real prospect of losing not just her tangible assets, but also all rights to her entire image collection."

http://www.illustratorspartnership.org/01_topics/article.php?searchterm=00135

S.G.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Jerry Witt (mcfilms) on April 17, 2012, 01:08:34 PM
This whole issue of Getty being able to claim infringement for a similar image on one hand, yet being able to duplicate another artist's work on the other, seems patently unfair.

I don't see how they won the case regarding the carousel. You can't copyright an idea or an abstract concept. If you told 12 photographers to take a romantic picture of a couple on a Carousel, two or three would come back with something that is equally similar to what Getty had. I wonder why the defense didn't consider doing this.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on April 17, 2012, 06:49:51 PM
McFilms, I agree with you completely.
We're also all aware of how court decisions can be unpredictable.
A well-thought out defense is paramount.

This brings to mind the case of Diodato vs Spade:
http://ny.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20050927_0001342.SNY.htm/qx

Although the photographs were similar, the concept was considered generic enough that Diodato lost the case.
Furthermore, the defendant Spade could show several other examples of such a photo concept being used for commercial purposes.

"Rather, both photos illustrate the freedom photographers have under the copyright laws to independently create their own conception and expression of a particular subject matter."

S.G.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on May 04, 2012, 03:52:58 AM
Update .... I have not received another letter or call from Getty.  It is now over 1 month past their so called deadline. I will not contact them and I have decided the bastards will have to take me to court if they want anything.  They will have to prove they own the images.  But I have a smoking gun.  I have the now removed video off the tech crunch site of the Getty CEO saying if you do not have any revenue and use their images that is ok.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on May 04, 2012, 06:36:49 AM
I had a feeling that video would have a short life span, it's a given that Getty monitors our forum...Might to have ask TechCrunch why it was removed.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Mulligan on May 04, 2012, 10:09:58 AM
Hmm, the video appeared okay and online to me this morning when I checked at:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/22/for-pinterest-revenue-will-turn-copyright-questions-into-problems/ (http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/22/for-pinterest-revenue-will-turn-copyright-questions-into-problems/)

I'm with Matt's instincts on replying three or four times. My thinking on this is that making my case and then having their non-responsive replies on paper is a good thing to do on the unlikely chance that this dispute ever actually end up in court.

I also fully understand and appreciate Soylent's approach, and at times I wish I'd gone that route. But I didn't because I like to fight.

I'm too old for a good, old fashioned knuckle buster where two men actually settle things face to face, but enough testosterone still leaks out on occasion to word battle various ass clowns from Getty Images as well as the creepy and condescending copyright trolls from Getty's outside counsel Timothy B. McCormack law firm.

I guess the bottom line is to do your homework and then move from there in the manner that best fits your disposition as well as how much time you have to devote to this exercise in absurdity.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on May 04, 2012, 11:19:17 AM
I just checked with a different browser, Chrome and the video is still there.  My IE is always flaking out. 

I was thinking if I was in the US I might be more prone to send a reply.  But I think since I live in Canada is is that much harder for them.  If I do get another letter I will update this thread and may decide to respond then.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Matthew Chan on May 04, 2012, 01:44:51 PM
The Jonathan Klein videos I posted include the two TechCrunch videos posted on YouTube at the very bottom. 

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/jonathan-klein-chief-executive-hypocrite-bullshitter-of-getty-images/

I sorted the videos in chronological order although the "best one" is the very last one discussing Intellectual Property.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on May 04, 2012, 02:54:30 PM
mreams, here's a little tidbit for Canadians:

"Registration, while not necessary, provides certain presumptions that are useful if the copyright is litigated and prevents any person from relying on the defence of “innocent infringement” (i.e., where the infringer did not know and had no reason to suspect that copyright existed in the work). If there is no registration, an infringer who successfully proves the defence of innocent infringement could be prohibited from further copying but would not be liable for damages."

from page 66:
http://www.osler.com/uploadedFiles/News_and_Resources/Publications/Guides/Doing_Business_in_Canada_-_2011/DBIC-Chapter13.pdf

I don't think that Getty has registered anything in Canada.  So, you could claim "innocent infringement", and not even have to pay the retail value of the image.

ProTip: I think that Masterfile has retained Osler (the source of the above quote) in the past for litigation...

S.G.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on May 23, 2012, 09:54:40 PM
Updatye ...May 23rd 2012 .....

Still have not anything yet.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 20, 2013, 02:19:43 AM
Today is Jan 20th 2013.

Just thought I would give an update.  Remember I live in Canada so that may make a difference in my situation.  My first letter was received about 10 months ago, then a second letter came 2 months later.  I have never contacted them or replied in any way.  As of today I have not had any calls, emails, or other letters sent to me.  I think they gave up because it was only 1 image in question.

Matt
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 04:52:59 PM
Of course this would happen.  2 days ago I posted an update that nothing has happened in months.  Today I got the following email:

Our file no XXXXXX
Re: Getty Images/Company Name
Settlement Offer:$1050.00
 
 
 
Please be advised that NCS has been retained by Getty Images with regard to the settlement of an image infringement claim in the above referenced matter. In that regard, we have been assigned this file, and have attached hereto copies of the letter previously sent by our client together with copies of the unauthorized images and the capture of said images on your website. Our client has attempted to resolve this claim by communicating with your company directly, but has been unable to do so. Our goal is to resolve this claim on an amicable basis, without having to resort to further action in this regard. We do have some flexibility with the amount claimed if this is resolved immediately. Alternatively, if we cannot settle this imminently, we would be obligated to refer the file back to our client for further action including the potential initiation of suit.  It would be preferable to settle this matter upon terms agreeable to both parties, and to avoid the time and expense of potential protracted litigation. We trust that we can resolve this amicably, and we look forward to hearing from in this regard upon receipt of this email.
 
 
Our client understands that a third-party designer, employee or intern may have been contracted to design and develop your company’s website. However, if no licenses for use of the images from our client exist, the liability of any infringement ultimately falls on the company displaying the imagery, which is considered the end user. If this situation applies to your company, please contact the third-party to inquire if there are any licenses from our client for the specific use of the images in question. If this is the case, please contact us as soon as possible to provide the invoice number or sales order number information and we will research accordingly. If a third party who supplied the images is willing to settle on your behalf, that third party may contact us to settle this matter. If the third party is unable or unwilling to settle on your behalf, we will continue to pursue your company as the end user of the image. Any pursuit by you of reimbursement from the third party would be between you and the third party, separate from our claim against you.
 
 
 
While we appreciate the removal of the represented images from your website, removal of the images alone does not settle the matter. Since your company has already infringed the copyright by using the image without a valid license, the photographers are entitled to compensation for the use of their work. Therefore, our client will continue to pursue settlement of the demand. We are seeking payment for the unlicensed use of the images.
 
 
 
This is an effort to effect a settlement and any information obtained will be used for that purpose.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
 

Darlene Connor
Recovery Specialist
NCS IP Solutions LLC
393 Interstate Blvd.
PO Box 50276
Sarasota, FL 34232
T - 941-371-9900x220
F - 941-371-9901
 
 
THIS IS AN EFFORT TO EFFECT A SETTLEMENT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.


Any advice anyone?
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on January 22, 2013, 05:06:18 PM
tell them this is a claim not a debt, they are required to send it back to Getty, tell them if they contact you again you will report them for misbehaving and not following the laws regarding the fair debt collection act ( or whatever it is called), they have no standing...then prepare to get a letter from ass hat seattle attorney Timothy B. McCormack....easy peasy..
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: stinger on January 22, 2013, 05:09:17 PM
This is kind of interesting, a FL company chasing a Canadian for Getty.  Isn't Timmy a lot closer geographically?  Or does he not chase cases where "innocent infringement" might be involved outside of the U.S.?
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on January 22, 2013, 05:27:46 PM
They're using a company in Florida to chase a Canadian because it's illegal for collection agencies in Canada to pursue people for something that's not a debt.

Now that Getty's messed up and done something that's illegal, they've basically screwed themselves. lol

S.G.

Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on January 22, 2013, 05:32:07 PM
in the meantime I'll be adding Darlene Connor / Recovery Specialist to the ever growing list of scumbag copyright trolls....
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 05:37:31 PM
tell them this is a claim not a debt, they are required to send it back to Getty, tell them if they contact you again you will report them for misbehaving and not following the laws regarding the fair debt collection act ( or whatever it is called), they have no standing...then prepare to get a letter from ass hat seattle attorney Timothy B. McCormack....easy peasy..

In their letter they did say it was "the settlement of an image infringement claim."   So do you mean because they are a debt collection agency they have no business getting involved?

I looked up Timothy B. McCormack the lawyer.  Just wondering why that part would be easy peasy.

Thanks for the input.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 05:39:24 PM
This is kind of interesting, a FL company chasing a Canadian for Getty.  Isn't Timmy a lot closer geographically?  Or does he not chase cases where "innocent infringement" might be involved outside of the U.S.?

If he doesn't wouldn't they just get someone who does?  Has anyone ever heard of a Canadian getting sued over 1 image?
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 05:40:13 PM
They're using a company in Florida to chase a Canadian because it's illegal for collection agencies in Canada to pursue people for something that's not a debt.

Now that Getty's messed up and done something that's illegal, they've basically screwed themselves. lol

S.G.

How has Getty messed up and done something illegal?
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on January 22, 2013, 05:44:53 PM
tell them this is a claim not a debt, they are required to send it back to Getty, tell them if they contact you again you will report them for misbehaving and not following the laws regarding the fair debt collection act ( or whatever it is called), they have no standing...then prepare to get a letter from ass hat seattle attorney Timothy B. McCormack....easy peasy..

In their letter they did say it was "the settlement of an image infringement claim."   So do you mean because they are a debt collection agency they have no business getting involved?

I looked up Timothy B. McCormack the lawyer.  Just wondering why that part would be easy peasy.

Thanks for the input.

"collection agencies" can only collect debts...this is clearly not a debt...so yes you are correct, they have no business being involved...this was/is the easy/peasy part...they have to abide by federal guidelines or risk being reported and fined...

Timmy is just a collection attorney...he can't sue you unless they allow him to, and they have never filed suit over 1 image and in the very few cases they have filed Timothy B McCormack was NEVER the attorney...says alot of Timmy right there...he's a friggin clerk, drinking from the kool-aid keg...
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 06:02:16 PM
tell them this is a claim not a debt, they are required to send it back to Getty, tell them if they contact you again you will report them for misbehaving and not following the laws regarding the fair debt collection act ( or whatever it is called), they have no standing...then prepare to get a letter from ass hat seattle attorney Timothy B. McCormack....easy peasy..

In their letter they did say it was "the settlement of an image infringement claim."   So do you mean because they are a debt collection agency they have no business getting involved?

I looked up Timothy B. McCormack the lawyer.  Just wondering why that part would be easy peasy.

Thanks for the input.

"collection agencies" can only collect debts...this is clearly not a debt...so yes you are correct, they have no business being involved...this was/is the easy/peasy part...they have to abide by federal guidelines or risk being reported and fined...

Timmy is just a collection attorney...he can't sue you unless they allow him to, and they have never filed suit over 1 image and in the very few cases they have filed Timothy B McCormack was NEVER the attorney...says alot of Timmy right there...he's a friggin clerk, drinking from the kool-aid keg...

I can reply to the collection agency regarding what we mentioned.  But do you think it is really worth it since they really have no power or authority anyway?  Eventually won't they just go away?  On the other hand maybe if I do reply they might think about taking on these type of cases.  (Most likely not since I am pretty sure they don't care)  But it would make me feel good to let them know I can not be bullied and that they are wrong.

Most likely I will write up a thoughtful reply to the collection agency telling them to buzz off.  If it ever did go to court I wonder would it be filed in a US court or a Canadian court?  I still have my ace in the hole tech crunch video of the CEO saying they would never ask for money until the user of the image was making a profit from it.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on January 22, 2013, 06:08:11 PM
replying has it's merits, IF if were to go in front of a judge, the judge would see you at least acknowledged it, ignoring it could put you in a bad light...they would have to file where you are, which in your case they would have to follow canadian law, hire a canadian lawyer, etc...eventually the whole thing will go away..3 years to be exact...you just have to tough it out for a while..
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: SoylentGreen on January 22, 2013, 06:12:23 PM
If you're Canadian, it would have to be filed in a Canadian court.
Also, Canadian laws would apply.

From what I understand, Canadian law doesn't allow for collection agencies to pursue legal demands for which no court judgement as been made (that is, "non-debts").
So, NCS/Getty broke Canadian law.  At the very least, this would create a legal problem for them if they were to pursue this.

In any case, Getty hasn't sued anybody in Canada in years, let alone for one image.
Personally, I wouldn't get into it with the collection agency unless they really harass you.
It's better to say as little as possible.  But, you may point out to them that what they are doing breaks Canadian laws.
That will promptly end it.

S.G.
Title: Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....
Post by: mreams on January 22, 2013, 06:20:27 PM
If you're Canadian, it would have to be filed in a Canadian court.
Also, Canadian laws would apply.

From what I understand, Canadian law doesn't allow for collection agencies to pursue legal demands for which no court judgement as been made (that is, "non-debts").
So, NCS/Getty broke Canadian law.  At the very least, this would create a legal problem for them if they were to pursue this.

In any case, Getty hasn't sued anybody in Canada in years, let alone for one image.
Personally, I wouldn't get into it with the collection agency unless they really harass you.
It's better to say as little as possible.  But, you may point out to them that what they are doing breaks Canadian laws.
That will promptly end it.

S.G.

Ahhh Ok ...understand it now, well explained.

Thanks