hypothetical infringement

[Lettered]

I'm still trying to understand how you can be liable for someone else's work on your website.  Here are a few made up examples that I find just as absurd as the Getty example.  Would these examples be different somehow, as compared to someone who unknowingly bought and displayed an infringing web site design?

1) What if a million people who ordered a Ford with a particular trim option, and it turned out that Chevrolet had the copyright on the particular trim design.  Could Chevrolet demand that the million Ford owners remove the trim and pay damages?

2) What about a thousand people who bought and displayed a bumper sticker whose manufacturer had stolen the design?

3) Or how about ten thousand people who brought a Christmas display (from manufacturer who had stolen the design) and displayed it on their lawn?

[dorim]

What this site is about and what the Getty letter is about are internet violations; your examples do not take place on the internet so they can not be compared with "stolen" website photographs and graphics.

[Lettered]

You're actually supporting the point I was trying to make.  Why do we assume that because this took place on the internet that it has some special treatment under the law?  As far as I can tell the parts of copyright law that do pertain specifically to the internet (DMCA) don't pertain at all to the Getty situation (not the vast majority of the cases anyway).  Personally, I can't see any philosopical, ethical, or legal differences in the cases I cited compared to the Getty accusations. It just seems to me that if you can establish the legal reason why any of the 3 cases I cited wouldn't be liable for damages that it would apply directly to the Getty situation.

 ... just a layman trying to understand ...

[Oscar Michelen]

All right, I will answer the three questions for you:

1) What if a million people who ordered a Ford with a particular trim option, and it turned out that Chevrolet had the copyright on the particular trim design. Could Chevrolet demand that the million Ford owners remove the trim and pay damages?

If there was a valid copyright to the trim design, then yes, they could be sued for copyright violation and then the million people would have a suit against Ford.  Of course, in your example, Chevy would just go right against Ford as it is a deep pocket. Getty doesn't go after the website developer because they are hard to track down, may be in India or Pakistan and normally can just shut down the business and re-open as something else.  The end users cannot do this.

2) What about a thousand people who bought and displayed a bumper sticker whose manufacturer had stolen the design?

Ditto.

3) Or how about ten thousand people who brought a Christmas display (from manufacturer who had stolen the design) and displayed it on their lawn?

Ditto