My Getty "experience" is over

[FoodWriter]

It ended with a single sentence: "Getty Images is no longer pursuing this matter."

My story: I have published a food blog for 13 years (they were called websites back then, not blogs). In 2000, I wrote an educational article about honey--not a sales/marketing piece, was not selling honey, etc. In 2010, I updated the article and thought adding an image would be an improvement. I went to the US honey trade association website and found a section for press/media that included free downloadable photos of honey for use in news articles. I chose an image and added it to my article.

In mid-September 2011, I got the Getty letter. I phoned and told them where/how I got the image, and they did not care--they wanted $875. I contacted the honey trade association and turns out they had already had a run-in with Getty about their downloadable images. The honey people had hired the photographer to take a series of honey photos for them in 2000. They still had the $8,000 invoice from the photo shoot, including an extra $1,000 for "unlimited PR usage" of the photos.

The honey people wrote a nice letter to Getty explaining the situation, attached a copy of the invoice, and said "buzz off":

"We believe that the <honey association> and <me> should not be held liable to the damages incurred from this situation. It is our recommendation that Getty Images contact <photographer name> for further clarification. Please let us know when this situation has been resolved."

And then today, an e-mail from Getty: "Getty Images is no longer pursuing this matter."

According to the original invoice, the photograph retained copyright to the photos. I guess at some point he hooked up with Getty and now they're going around trying to collect money from people like me who were making legitimate use of the photos.

I know my situation is kind of a corner case, but wanted to share a small Getty victory with the good folks here in the forum. And good luck to all of you as you deal with your Getty situations.

Regards,
FoodWriter

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Thanx for sharing!!!! Just goes to show that if people are diligent, they don't have to give in.. DO YOUR HOMEWORK PEOPLE!

"buzz off" - great choice of words considering the source!

Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

[Matthew Chan]

This is a seriously awesome post. I agree with Buddhapi on doing your homework.  Put on your thinking caps and analyze the situation.  Don't just go dark and ignore.

Too many people want to play ignorant and hope it goes away by itself.  In you case, you dealt with this head-on with intelligence and you got a great result.

You should be proud of yourself for successfully navigating your way through this.

People want a success story?  Well, you generously provided one for our community.  Thanks so much.

Matthew

[SoylentGreen]

Yes!!  A good story indeed.

The photographer in question was "double dipping"; getting paid for the photo shoot, and the licensing them through Getty.  It's greed, plain and simple.

This also illustrates why people shouldn't believe the "Getty has only exclusive contracts" and "Getty owns copyright" statements with without verifying the facts.

S.G.

[Oscar Michelen]

Nice result! You are lucky that your developer had records and kept the proof.