ELI Forums > Getty Images Letter Forum
Lapixa copyright email received by client
web_dev_chick:
Hi, All!
I'm curious about an email that a former client of mine received. I built a website for her about 18 months ago and used several images that I licensed through my account with Adobe Stock. She received an email this week from a company called Lapixa, who is claiming that one of these images is an "unauthorized use" of their client's work.
The email mentions "In the interest of avoiding litigation we would like to offer you a retroactive license to cover the use which has already occurred on your website, subject to compliance with the following conditions by November 8, 2018" with said conditions including removing the image from the site (which I have already done) and paying a "retroactive fee" of around $450.
I'm not entirely sure what to do. Adobe Stock does allow for transferral of license to employer/client, so do they have any kind of a case here? While I am no longer doing work for this client, I still want to keep former clients happy, because, you know, good references and all that.
Thanks for the help.
Matthew Chan:
You said you licensed it so the license is under your name and website, not your client. So that is probably how the situation got flagged. It seems to me you just need to explain the situation of what happened. The image was obtained legitimately by you on behalf of the client. This happens frequently with contractors and their clients. Get your proof of purchase/receipt where you did this. It also helps if you are not using the image anywhere else.
Let us know how it turns out.
--- Quote from: web_dev_chick on October 18, 2018, 05:53:15 PM ---Hi, All!
I'm curious about an email that a former client of mine received. I built a website for her about 18 months ago and used several images that I licensed through my account with Adobe Stock. She received an email this week from a company called Lapixa, who is claiming that one of these images is an "unauthorized use" of their client's work.
The email mentions "In the interest of avoiding litigation we would like to offer you a retroactive license to cover the use which has already occurred on your website, subject to compliance with the following conditions by November 8, 2018" with said conditions including removing the image from the site (which I have already done) and paying a "retroactive fee" of around $450.
I'm not entirely sure what to do. Adobe Stock does allow for transferral of license to employer/client, so do they have any kind of a case here? While I am no longer doing work for this client, I still want to keep former clients happy, because, you know, good references and all that.
Thanks for the help.
--- End quote ---
web_dev_chick:
I appreciate the reassurance. I did provide her with the info/invoice on my site subscription and when the image was licensed and downloaded. Unfortunately, Adobe Stock doesn't provide much more than that for the images licensed through a monthly subscription, but hopefully it will do. I have not used the image anywhere else.
I'm very frustrated by all of this as I try to be super careful about only using images I have downloaded from stock sites with a purchase or subscription. Is there any way to prevent this from happening again? Or do I just have to continue to be prepared with documentation as needed?
And I will certainly post if I hear anything more from her on this.
Matthew Chan:
I have not heard about this Lapixa firm before. Do you mind emailing it to me at matt30060 / gmail so I can have a look at it?
--- Quote from: web_dev_chick on October 18, 2018, 07:50:22 PM ---I appreciate the reassurance. I did provide her with the info/invoice on my site subscription and when the image was licensed and downloaded. Unfortunately, Adobe Stock doesn't provide much more than that for the images licensed through a monthly subscription, but hopefully it will do. I have not used the image anywhere else.
I'm very frustrated by all of this as I try to be super careful about only using images I have downloaded from stock sites with a purchase or subscription. Is there any way to prevent this from happening again? Or do I just have to continue to be prepared with documentation as needed?
And I will certainly post if I hear anything more from her on this.
--- End quote ---
Matthew Chan:
A Lapixa letter was submitted to me for review so I had the opportunity to read it over.
Lapixa has a website and a contact page: https://lapixa.com/contact/
Based on the letter and website, Lapixa appears to be a German-based operation. However, they are claiming 25 New Chardon St, Boston, MA as its U.S. presence. Based on this alone, most people in the U.S. don't have to worry too much about it. The name "Serge Licht, CEO" is signed on the letter.
Based on the one Napixa letter, they are asking payment for a "retroactive license" plus an "administration fee". I have never seen an "administration fee" in addition to a retroactive license fee before.
Another thing that Lapixa does is source "FotoQuote" which Lapixa claims to be "the industry standard photo pricing guide." The only thing I could find on FotoQuote is that it appears to be software developed by Cradox fotoSoftware. Without seeing the software, it sounds to me anyone can buy the software and upload any kind of values into it. As such, it does not strike to me as any real measurement of market value of any given photo.
In the context of ELI discussions, market value of photos are NOT what is listed on any website. It is actually what any given photo has been sold for. Of course, that is generally inaccessible to the public because the public never really know what prices real customers pay for any given image or in some cases, an image was ever sold at all!
For people in North America, I do not see Lapixa demand letters as any real threat at this early juncture. Things could change in the future but for now, this is my first awareness of Lapixa.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version