I paid for the images before using but got a demand letter

[PoorRichard]

I paid for two images on Getty's website before having my web developer put them on my site.

We used the images for about 8 months and the site had at most 100 visitors. Mostly family and friends. I had no product sales at all.

Getty issued a demand letter requesting $1775 stating that we had never paid for the images in the first place.

I contacted Getty images by phone and they stated that the license that I purchased was only good for "a few months of use". This was not clear at the time of purchase!

Another thing is that one of the images I purchased was swapped out for a different image. This was because the colors didn't go with our site, so we decided to use a different Getty image. Once we picked a new image (same size, same price) I contacted Getty by phone to do the switch after our initial purchase. I was helped by phone and I have no emails to prove this and they denied this too.

Does it help or hurt that I in fact paid for the images before this demand letter was sent and before the images went on the site, even if the alleged "6 month use" restriction is true?

The entire website has been offline since they contacted me by phone several months ago.

[PoorRichard]

I emailed Oscar but haven't heard back. The demand letter has a deadline of next week.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Oscar will follow up, he's very busy with his regular practice, as well as helping us on the side. don't read to much into the "deadline", it's just another scare tactic they like to use..

[Matthew Chan]

It doesn't help when people continue to ask for "free" consultation and individual email replies. We are going to take a much harder stand about replying to anyone.  People need to start doing their homework.  If not, then they can simply live in fear. Or they will have to pay for time and advice.

Oscar gets a ton of people trying for "freebie" advice and it clogs up the system for the people who legitimately want to pay for his service.

Pretty soon, I am going to start hanging up on people that even mention any demand letter.  I have NOT offered my phone number up for the demand letter situation but people find me anyway.

Oscar will follow up, he's very busy with his regular practice, as well as helping us on the side. don't read to much into the "deadline", it's just another scare tactic they like to use..

[SoylentGreen]

Many people truly appreciate this forum that you have worked so hard to create and maintain Matt.
We also appreciate how much work Oscar has put into this.  A huge thank you!!

Your call email/call volume has probably gone up as people become aware of the site, and as the extortion letter efforts go into overdrive.
But, you already know that.

Yes, many of the same issues come up again and again that have been discussed previously.
So, visitors can find lots of info in past discussions in most cases.

Yeah, nobody's going to work for free.
I've chatted with colleagues looking for work, and I can't believe how many "employers" treat "job interviews" as free consultations with a professional.
Attitudes need to change.

S.G.

[PoorRichard]

It doesn't help when people continue to ask for "free" consultation and individual email replies. We are going to take a much harder stand about replying to anyone.  People need to start doing their homework.  If not, then they can simply live in fear. Or they will have to pay for time and advice.

Oscar gets a ton of people trying for "freebie" advice and it clogs up the system for the people who legitimately want to pay for his service.

Pretty soon, I am going to start hanging up on people that even mention any demand letter.  I have NOT offered my phone number up for the demand letter situation but people find me anyway.

Oscar will follow up, he's very busy with his regular practice, as well as helping us on the side. don't read to much into the "deadline", it's just another scare tactic they like to use..

Matt, I'm not sure if you are having a bad day or if you are just unprofessional. I did not come here seeking "free" advice or to "bother" anyone. I WOULD HAVE been a paying customer, both for your $195 "letter" (which I'm sure, is so overused by now that it doesn't work) AND I also contacted Oscar's practice and Oscar by email for PAID help. Do you automatically assume that everyone on the Internet is looking for something for free? Stick it. I'm so glad I didn't do business with you two. I will handle this on my own with my own IP attorney even if it costs me more in the long run. You put a bad taste in my mouth. Good luck guy.

[Matthew Chan]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. The comment was not directed at you in anyway. It was just a vent based on buddhapi's comment about Oscar getting backed up. He could have made that same comment under anyone's post and I would have vented the same way. Let me repeat, I apologize if I offended you. My side comment had NOTHING to do with your posting. I agree with you there was nothing in your post to suggest you wanted anything for free.

What I was getting at is because of the ongoing onslaught of emails and phone calls from people looking for free advice and consultation, it clogs up and delays from legitimate requests to hire such as yourself. Does that make sense? I should have expanded my comment that it was not directed at you.

As a side comment, Oscar's letter would only NOT work if Getty's legal team totally disregards professional rules of legal conduct. You could present the same letter yourself and it would carry no weight because part of the letter verbiage is to instruct Getty to forward any future communications to Oscar. It may have been used a few hundred times but I promise you, the instructions are very clear within the letter to not directly contact the client being represented.

And I don't get any business from anyone who hires Oscar. I am not part of his law firm in anyway. Whether anyone hires Oscar doesn't directly impact me. I recommend him because he is the most well-versed person in this issue that I know that would even consider taking on anyone for $195.  Admittedly, you do give up some level of personal service. It is a personal choice to pay for more more personal service or pay less for a "canned" but effective representation.

Anyhow, I am not beyond apologizing for my part in misunderstandings. I hope you will accept mine. It was done on a day where there was a wave of calls and emails. So yes, it was considered to be an irritating day for me.  :-)

Matthew

Matt, I'm not sure if you are having a bad day or if you are just unprofessional. I did not come here seeking "free" advice or to "bother" anyone. I WOULD HAVE been a paying customer, both for your $195 "letter" (which I'm sure, is so overused by now that it doesn't work) AND I also contacted Oscar's practice and Oscar by email for PAID help. Do you automatically assume that everyone on the Internet is looking for something for free? Stick it. I'm so glad I didn't do business with you two. I will handle this on my own with my own IP attorney even if it costs me more in the long run. You put a bad taste in my mouth. Good luck guy.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

@PoorRicard -- I hope you see how wires got crossed and Matt's comments were not directed toward you. I hope you will decide to return and join the fight.

[Matthew Chan]

Admittedly, I do accidentally (and sometimes intentionally) tick people off from time to time.  Grace and tact are not one of my strong suits to be sure....

Matthew