My 1st Copyright Letter

[kyke]

I received a copyright infringement letter from Hawaiian Art Network LLC demanding money for around $900 for a photo on my website.  The photo was downloaded from a free site that had a download button for the picture and specifically said "feel free to use our large selection of wallpapers, photos, backgrounds for website, blogs etc"  I fell for that and now got this letter saying it was copyright infringement. 
I called them back and told them I had taken it down and was not using it anymore.  They said they could lower the price to $750.   They sent me a screen shot of a license quote from Getty images for use and duration along with an invoice from Hawaiian Art Network LLC.  I am confused on all this?   My understanding is that Hawaiian Art has the copyright but then why is Getty Images have a license quote??
I am thankful I found this website that has given me much needed information but I am still concerned if I settle and pay what they want....even though I feel it is an outrageous amount....how do I know this won't happen again?  The whole "getting legal team involved"  that they said would happen if I don't pay by a certain date scares me!   
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

We'd very much like to see this letter and perhaps post it ( with your information removed ) This is not the first instance from Hawaiin Art Network, but it is the first they are quoting something from Getty. It's been suggested that some artists affiliated with Hawaiin Art Network are seeding images on free download sites, then following up with demand letters, it would also be helpful to us and you case if you could link the site you used. We recently had a little run in with a couple of their attorneys, so I'm also curious as to which one sent this little gem.

I can send you my email if your willing to share the letter, just PM me.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Just a second thought, Hawaiian Art Network most likely does not own the copyright, but that still does not explain Getty's involvement, I doubt they are involved. My hope is if we can get enough people in your same situation ( downloading from a free site) that you guys can possibly fight back and draw a really big win, hopefully shutting down this business practice of seeding images on free sites.. I see H.A.N. just filed 2 suits, I am going to reach out to the defendants and see if they obtained the images the same way. will keep you posted if I learn anything..

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

It looks like the image in question here appears on at least 165 other sites, some of which are wallpaper sites, which for some strange reason does not surprise me..and I also see this image is owned by none other than V.K. Tylor, again no surprise there either...

[Matthew Chan]

To answer your question, anyone can get hit by repeated letters.  That is why getting educated and being part of a defense community such as ELI that reports on such matters is important.  Oscar Michelen is also a legal resource for us.

They are looking to pick people off one by one.

I am thankful I found this website that has given me much needed information but I am still concerned if I settle and pay what they want....even though I feel it is an outrageous amount....how do I know this won't happen again?  The whole "getting legal team involved"  that they said would happen if I don't pay by a certain date scares me!   
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

kyke -- I didn't catch your post the first time through.

I know it gets pretty nerve wracking when these firms start talking about the tens of thousands you will be libel for, I've been there. But as long as people keep rolling over, they will keep doing it. If what you say is accurate, I don't see how they have a case. I posted this in another thread, but I wanted to re-iterate it in the context of your situation.

Here are some questions I would ask them in the next letter:

Is this photo registered the copyright for the image at the US copyright office?
Can they provide you with proof of registration?
Are they aware that numerous web sites are representing their images as "free" or "free to download and use"?
If so, what action has client taken to stop them?
Although they showed a screenshot from Getty Images for some other image, how did they arrive at the valuation of this image? (Remind them that iStockphoto offers images in that size for $5 and the site you obtained that image from was free.)
Ask them what relationship do they have with the site that hosted that image.

To me you are well within your rights to require this information prior to any talk of a "settlement." You've seen first hand how easy it is for someone to misrepresent the rights they have to an image and you don't want it to happen again.

For your part, be sure to document everything. Screenshots and urls of the site you got the image from, but also the other ones offering it for free. Many people on this site have indicated to me that they suspect HAN may be behind seeding these images to the wallpaper sites in the hopes of doing exactly what they are doing now. No one has been able to provide me with proof of that yet. However the images they represent do seem to show up on a remarkable number of "wallpaper" sites and strangely we have no evidence of them asking those sites to stop.

Bottom line, don't panic. As you educate yourself you will learn that many people have gone through this already.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

As usual this is good advice from MCFilms, make them suck as much of their time as possible, but don't agree to anything, and as mentioned document everything!

[tlam]

I just recieved a phone call and email from this company but not from an attorney.   It was from their account director.

"By completing a payment of $452.00 to Hawaiian Art Network LLC. by January 9th, 2012, Hawaiian Art Network LLC. will agree to retroactively license the Photograph in question as used to promote XXXXXXX since the day you first published it and agree to forgo any claims of copyright infringement, statutory damages, loss of income, and attorney fees.  This amount represents the market value of this rights-managed image that would be due if the image was licensed without any additional fees or penalty.  You can confirm this by using the Getty Image calculator at http://www.gettyimages.com/Price/PriceRMPopup.aspx?BrandIDs=41&ImageIDs=450539-001&Source=order."

Do you guys think I should pay this?

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Hell no! They have no business using getty pricing as there own, a phone call is rather unprofessional, demand they send you documentation by mail, don't give them your address, let them find it themselves...most importantly read the other posts regarding this...stand your ground, chances are slim they would ever file a suit for 1 images ( unless your in hawaii then it may be different)....rememebr they have to prove you are guilty, not just assume as much

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I can't believe they have now resorted to calling..time to go read up on the do not call specifics..

[tlam]

Their email has screenshots and links of their image on my site.  The guy on the phone said they would rather us pay for the time we used the image then have it "go to legal."  I told him I would get back to him.  Are these images really that expensive?  I would not have used it if I knew it cost that much, thats for sure.  I had it on my site for about two years.  I am going to talk to an attorney this week and see what he says.  I will let you know what happens.

[kyke]

I too am seeking some advice from an attorney this week based on my emails which sound alot like yours tlam.  I will keep you informed what I find out. 

[lucia]

Is this photo registered the copyright for the image at the US copyright office?
Can they provide you with proof of registration?
Are they aware that numerous web sites are representing their images as "free" or "free to download and use"?
If so, what action has client taken to stop them?
Although they showed a screenshot from Getty Images for some other image, how did they arrive at the valuation of this image? (Remind them that iStockphoto offers images in that size for $5 and the site you obtained that image from was free.)
Ask them what relationship do they have with the site that hosted that image.

I'm dealing with Getty who replied to my first letter. I may end up putting these up.  For now:
How would you word a request that they prove that a photo is registered with the US copyright office?  Do I ask for registration numbers? Etc.

[SoylentGreen]

You should ask for copies of the registration documents.
Keep in mind that Getty might have "documents", but many of these are faulty and useless to them from a legal standpoint.
You may have read about Getty's recent court loss; their documentation was useless for each of nearly 40 different images.

Don't be surprised that Getty won't send you any proof.
But, that's a good sign that they don't have much to go on legally.

S.G.

[KeithStoneberger]

I have a website set up for my mother and she got a letter today in the mail from getty images for a copyright infringement and want $75 I believe... I got the letter and the image they said to be in violation is nowhere near any images I have had or currently have on the site now... here is the copy of the email I just recently sent to them:

To whom it may concern:

First I would like to commend you on your efforts of trying to crack down on illegal use of images by others on the internet. It is a difficult task at hand and the burden of proof regarding intellectual property is difficult one at best. Normally the one who is first to post copyright will 9 times out of 10 will be the victor. With that said, your letter dated December 15th, 2011 with the above case number has two faults that I would like to bring to your attention.

Number 1:
The party listed in the letter does not own the domain name nor has control as to what is posted to the above named website. With proper technique, the original owner is easily discoverable with the proper contact info.

Number 2:
The image in question listed above has never been used nor does it even remotely resembles any other photos that is or has been displayed on the above named  website. Even with the subpar screen capture provided, the differences can be noted.

This mistake in the details will be overlooked at this time but any future attempts to collect payment regarding this matter will be construed as harassment and will result in the receipt of a public apology and compensatory damages allowable by law.

I encourage you to be more careful in the near future. If you have any further questions, this email is the contact method of choice I prefer.

/-- end of letter--/