ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: Totally Fed up on February 22, 2012, 08:41:58 PM
-
Hi Everyone,
I have been reading the forum for quite some time and also got the 'letter.'
I don't want to say too much in public just in case they are reading this. I did call them and they did go down in price a small bit, however, when I tried to get them to go down further, an argument broke out instead. I am usually a nice person but this just really made me mad as they charge way too much money. They are charging me for 2 pics that I was ignorant enough to think were free online. I took the pictures down of course right away and never even had them up there long but of course that doesn't matter to them. They truly are extortionists and how ashamed they should be for doing this to good people. I might have said some things I shouldnt have and ended the conversation with 'well then, take me to court' Funny how the whole plan was to be cordial and it did start out that way but...
I had the whole thing planned out what i was going to say and they made me so mad it didn't come out the way I wanted. So now I am wondering, with that said, what do you think they will do next. If you want more details you can email me and I will be happy to share. Thanks for all the information on this forum. I do appreciate it and will continue to read it! I'm just so disappointed that a wealthy man can own a company and do this to people. I don't understand this at all.
-
I know this respose may be a tad bit late, since you have already had a verbal conversation with them. In my opinion, it is best to correspond in writing only. This way you have an audit trail if is does go to court. Also, when you are writing words, it is easier to edit out the emotional parts before you send it. It gives you time to calm down and rethink how you sound. So unless, they recorded your conversation and the state laws allow recordings without your knowledge, I wouldn't worry too much about what was said, however, if it were me, I would sit down and write a letter responding to their claims without admitting any wrong doing. Go through these posts and you will get a good idea of what to ask for as far as evidence. By the time they respond, you will have become much more knowledgeable and will better know which course of action you wish to persue.
-
Good reply from Bekka! You have to remember when "speaking with them, they are generally a bunch of paper pushing monkeys, reading the corporate script.
(sorry if I insulted monkeys). Writing is always the best option.
-
Thanks! I don't regret what I said so much, just how I said it- in the angry tone, even if they do deserve it for being so disrespectful, I still regret doing it.
A letter is a good idea for the next step.
Thanks for the advice! :)
-
you can expect pretty much the same tone/response with a letter, but at least you'll have something that shows some good faith on your part, IF it ever goes further..
-
I'm under the impression that many of these conversations get fairly heated. It's not really unusual.
Also, their attitude stems from talking to people all day who basically figure that their negotiating skills will convince Getty (or whoever) to take zero dollars.
I haven't heard of a single person who has those kind of skills.
Personally, I feel that contacting them is mainly a waste of time and not really in one's best interest.
If you need clarification, Getty won't provide any. You might get them to lower the demand a little bit. But, what's the point of that if you'll never pay them?
I think that sending them a letter *might* be useful if you're sure that they'll escalate the situation and you've got them where you want them;
ie it's not your domain, it's a DMCA issue, the statute of limitations has expired, etc.
Even then, they'll still bother you. But, it might save everyone the effort of an escalation.
Otherwise, just save your breath.
S.G.
-
See I think that in the highly unlikely event of this going to court, it is to your advantage to be able to show that you made a good faith attempt to come to a reasonable settlement. I also think that it is to your advantage to require proof of registration and the chain of title for the images. You'll also need the sales history for this image to prove that it is actually licensing for the amount they are claiming and not just some inflated price they pulled out of thin air. And it is worth it to do this all in writing.
Typically they (GI and HAN) will claim that they only produce this documentation in the event this goes to court. Knowing what I know now, I believe the correct response is to shrug (or the written equivalent) and make it clear that this information is mandatory in order for you to even consider offering money. Masterfile does seem to be more buttoned up than the others and often provides some proof of registration. But even their paperwork needs careful scrutiny.
Also, I wouldn't get too down on yourself for loosing it. These banditos have found a legal loophole through which they are trying to pull hundreds of dollars out of your pocket. You have every right to get pissed. But a written reply allows you to remain above that and say, "You have told me what you want, now here is what I require."
-
Don't forget to tell them about the Resolution of Getty v. Advernet , where they lost their claims for many images.
(A blow to Getty & Stock photo companies)
http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/resolution-of-getty-v-advernet-(a-blow-to-getty-stock-photo-companies)/
-
I can't argue with McFilm's logic; showing that one at least tried to work with them indicates quite a bit of goodwill.
S.G.
-
As mentioned before, I do agree with Mcfilms in responding and asking questions to show good will. HOWEVER, I wish to also state that what Soylent has been trying to get across to everyone is that in doing so, the trolls will NOT give you the answers that you seek and will CONTINUE to try and get you to PAY REGARDLESS. In other words, asking questions is NOT going to necessarily make them GO AWAY.
Yes, in the unlikely event that you are sued over a couple of images by Getty, especially if there is no registration number and they do not have "exclusive rights" to the image/s in question, it IS in your best interest to respond and try to resolve the issue. YES, you are entitled to ask for PROOF before handing over a large sum of money.
So you have to decide what you are going to do when they refuse to show you PROOF. In other words, can you stand the CONTINUED threats, or are you going to hire an attorney to make them STOP completely. THIS is why Soylent says, "don't waste your breath".
-
Right. That's a very good point, Peeved. What SG and Matt have been talking about is the idea that you're not gonna out-lawyer a lawyer. And SG is right that if you hope a discussion with them is going to get them to change their mind, then you are misinformed. All you can do is throw up obstacles and demand information that MIGHT get them to question whether going after this yahoo is really worth it.
-
Totally agree Mcfilms. The sucky part however is that you get to wait three years before you know for SURE whether or not you were successful in throwing out enough "obstacles". It's all such B.S!
-
Well with all the input here is sounds like the best thing to do is write this letter and especially to ask if it is indeed copyrighted. The pictures by the way are from the infamous stone collection I hear others on here have mentioned in the past. I havent found them on any other sites for sale but images comparable to this go for under $10. Our argument was over price and what the actual images were worth. I did a cached search of my site and that particular page of the site wasnt even created till jan of 2011. It doesn't even show that I even had those images on the site at all except for the one snap shot of my page they took in Dec. of the same year. Even the back up files I saved doesnt show the image was on there so it had to be on there less than one month, and on their site they charge over $200 for one month of use for the image which I'm sure sites like National Geographic (who they say are clients) find reasonable, but people just getting by including me, think is outrageous. So yes, I would like to find out the history of what they charged for that image and if it is indeed a registered copyrighted image as I, like many on here feel like I'm being taken.
What I can't understand is, isn't the guy who owns this company incredibly rich? Why would someone like that find this loophole and create a division in the company solely to intimidate and basically steal from innocent hard working people? The tactics they use border on criminal behavior and yet they're still allowed to poison the world with their deceit adding them to a long list of wrongdoers. I can see why why this site was madeand why people are even protesting in New York and all over. The problem can be summed up with one word: GREED.
I want to thank the creators and contributors on this site for creating it and supplying this information and especially your input on my case. :)
-
Getty Images is no longer owned by the Getty Family, tho Mark getty still sits on the board. I think he was a great grandson / grandson or something that started the business, who later sold it to some sort of holding company. Yes the elder Getty was filthy rich and he got that was by taking advantage of people, and was known to not be a very nice personin general..
From Wikipedia:
In 1993, Mark Getty and Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Klein co-founded Getty Investments LLC. Mark Getty is the company's chairman.
In September 1997, Getty Communications, as it was called at the time, merged with PhotoDisc, Inc. to form Getty Images.
In April 2003 Getty Images entered into a partnership with Agence France-Presse (AFP) to market each other's images.
Getty Images acquired the Michael Ochs Archives in February 2007.The Michael Ochs Archives were described by The New York Times as "the premier source of musician photography in the world".
In 2008, the private equity firm Hellman & Friedman acquired Getty Images.
In 2009, Flickr announced a partnership with Getty Images in which specially selected users could submit photographs for stock photography usage and receive payment.
In 2010 this was changed so that users could label images as suitable for stock use themselves.
There are definately issues with the "stone collection" as they were available on CD years ago, then GI snapped them up..
-
Just curious... do any readers of the forum presently own the royalty free "Stone Collection" cd-roms?
If so, could the owner kindly submit a copy of the license/copyright agreement for examination?
This would really be a key piece of the puzzle, and could prove what Getty seems to be doing.
Additionally, it would help other extortion letter recipients.
S.G.
-
I had them at one time, and would be willing to bet I still have them somewhere, I've been looking for the last week or so, If my memory serves me ( which sometimes it doesn't) I think it was a stack of 10-12 CD's, broken down into category's, I'll keep digging, may have to head into the attic next..
-
A quick update and a question. I did write a letter to them after making a phone call twice, and about 3 weeks later I am told a letter came back to me but they wanted the person to sign for it as I wasnt there and they refused. So I have no idea now what their response would have been or what is going to happen next.
I do have a question though, If they decide to go to court, will you get a certified letter in the mail or will someone knock at your door and say, you have been served? My letter to them basically asked if the images were registered and I wanted a history of the prices of the images since they were asking for so much for them from me. So they could have had an answer to that. I did do a search and did not find them in the copyright office however.
So what do I do next, just wait to see what happens? I don't see a point in contacting them at all. What do you think?
-
I find it hard to imagine they would file suit over 2 images, but the fact they may have sent a registered letter is a bit concerning. I thinhk ( and I'm not positive) that in order to be "served" it has to be done in person, by an official of some sort. I would be tempted to wait it out and see what happens next, but it's your call. Do you know if the letter was from getty, or perhaps NCS recovery?? or maybe even McCormack?
-
Yes it was from getty. So you are thinking that after sending them a letter it is not common for them to send a registered letter back then?
-
well it's the first I've heard of something like this. I wouldn't get to freaked, as it may have been a copy of the same letter they first sent you, with the exception of them stating that they will provide the requested info when it goes to court..which is a typical response.
-
So what do I do next, just wait to see what happens? I don't see a point in contacting them at all. What do you think?
Wait. Wait and dodge. Your job is to make it as painful and as difficult as possible for them to try and squeeze money out of you. Their certified letter arrived when you weren't around to sign for it? Tough luck. Let them try and contact you again. You gave them very legitimate questions you needed answered before you could even consider their claim. They have yet to provide answers. Ball's in their court.
-
I agree with McFilms, of course.
I also think that this is all trickery on the part of Getty and McCormack to make it appear that the case has been "escalated".
I'm thinking that the alleged "certified letter" thing is a lie.
If there was a certified letter sent to you, wouldn't you receive a notice to sign for it and pick it up at the post office?
Even if you weren't "home", you'd get a notice in your regular mail.
If was a courier that came, they'd leave a notice in your door that they'd come by the next day, or you could pick it up at the local office.
Anyone worried about an actual lawsuit can check Justia Dockets to see if anything's been filed.
Nope. Nothing new on there.
Lawsuits haven't worked for Getty, and all they have left are tricks and intimidation.
Don't fall for it. You can find the truth about any of this stuff.
The "golden age" of the stock image market was when the web went "graphical" up until the dot-com bust/911.
It was slipping past before most people even realized it was happening.
I think that the golden age of stock image copyright trolling is on the decline as well.
People can find out in seconds what it's all about and how to fight it.
Judges know all about it now, too.
S.G.
-
hi all, I have to explain more on this and why it seems confusing. The certified letter came to the house but someone was there, just not me, so someone refused to sign for the letter because they didnt know what it was so I think when you refuse it, it goes back to the sender. well in the meantime, a few weeks went by and this time they send the Mccormick letter asking for more than twice the amount of the original price. (this wasnt a certified letter) Didnt give me any info on copyright or answer any of my questions at all, just the same bs that you have 3 weeks to pay etc. so I am wondering now that they are asking for more, do I write and offer a settlement on what I feel is right to pay then let it go from there, or just ignore the letter and wait and see. If I ignore it, do they raise the price in each letter when you receive it?
another question, can I get an LLC for the business at this time and will that protect me if this goes further or because they started this months ago, is this something that wont work to protect me? They are not sueing, just asking for money, so I am thinking this might be a good move. Any thoughts on this? thanks for all your help. When Michael gets that book together I am so buying it!!
-
hi all, I have to explain more on this and why it seems confusing. The certified letter came to the house but someone was there, just not me, so someone refused to sign for the letter because they didnt know what it was so I think when you refuse it, it goes back to the sender. well in the meantime, a few weeks went by and this time they send the Mccormick letter asking for more than twice the amount of the original price. (this wasnt a certified letter) Didnt give me any info on copyright or answer any of my questions at all, just the same bs that you have 3 weeks to pay etc. so I am wondering now that they are asking for more, do I write and offer a settlement on what I feel is right to pay then let it go from there, or just ignore the letter and wait and see. If I ignore it, do they raise the price in each letter when you receive it?
another question, can I get an LLC for the business at this time and will that protect me if this goes further or because they started this months ago, is this something that wont work to protect me? They are not sueing, just asking for money, so I am thinking this might be a good move. Any thoughts on this? thanks for all your help. When Michael gets that book together I am so buying it!!
Given your questions, I must say that it sounds like your fear is starting to get the best of you. Their tactics appear to be working here. Have you considered Oscar's Letter Program? For a couple hundred bucks you would not have to worry about being further contacted by any of them directly. Perhaps it's something to think about.
-
The fear will last a day or so then turn to being pissed off again so I dont mind hanging in there but would like to know what to expect from here. Do I ignore the letters from now on from Mccormick, or send what I feel is a reasonable offer to pay it off which wouldnt be much to them I am sure?
-
The fear will last a day or so then turn to being pissed off again so I dont mind hanging in there but would like to know what to expect from here. Do I ignore the letters from now on from Mccormick, or send what I feel is a reasonable offer to pay it off which wouldnt be much to them I am sure?
Unfortunately no one can predict "exactly" what to expect from the trolls because every case is different. Without legal counsel, the trolls can and will continue to put pressure on you to get you to pay. They can send as many threatening letters as they wish, raise the demand price, or whatever it takes to get you to pay.
If you have been following the threads here, you will see that most people who have made "reasonable" offers have had those offers rejected. It's really up to you to decide whether or not you wish to continue to go back and forth with them. You have already demanded proof and asked the right questions for which they have refused to give you answers.
"GAME OVER" in my opinion.
Handling it on your own means dealing with the threats and learning what happens next as you go along, same as others in the same situation. If you are not ready to fight this all the way on your own, again hire Oscar.
Always wishing the best.
-
Ok thanks! The way I see it now is going back and forth is pointless really. They want one thing, I want another and definitely feel my rights have been violated or to put it another way, I'm being ripped off.
I did put the effort in by calling and writing. I still feel they are unreasonable and wrong and even if someone came to me, gave me the money to pay them, and I did, I would always feel they won on something that was so very wrong and I don't want to be the one contributing and feeding on something that should be taken down for good. I wish it was possible for all of us to sue them at the same time and stop them from doing this to anyone they feel like it. When I tell others they go after people who bought the images, they can't believe it and I plan to tell as many people that I can reach so they are very informed when wanting to put a picture on their site.
I suppose that's why Matthew made this site to begin with and in reading the forums I can see its helped many!
I find this interesting: If they can put technology in the picture to track it, why don't they put technology in the picture that tells someone their license expired or it is copyrighted? I am sure it is not hard to do for a programmer.
We all know the answer to that! thanks everyone for the advice and help! :)
-
This might sound a bit cynical but I have found most people don't give 2 licks about this issue until THEY get THE LETTER.
Then, all of a sudden everyone hangs on every word that Oscar and I say. But for the most part, most people are oblivious and even when you tell them, it really doesn't register.
Early on, I used to try to proactively get the word out. Not any more. Basically, I sit back and let people come to this website. We are all over the Google search engine nowadays. It's really strange to have the people we dislike continue to drive people our way.
The meaner and badder the copyright trolls are, the greater our stature becomes in all this. Of course, the meaner and badder they are to ELI, the harder and meaner we bite back also.
A number of lawyers have learned the hard way with their tarnished reputations.
When I tell others they go after people who bought the images, they can't believe it and I plan to tell as many people that I can reach so they are very informed when wanting to put a picture on their site.
I suppose that's why Matthew made this site to begin with and in reading the forums I can see its helped many!
-
I agree with Matt's sentiments, most people could care less until they are forced to get involved. I tell every new potential client about the pitfalls of stock photo's and I can clearly tell by their demeanor, they could care less, and have even had several state they would take their chances. I've gone so far as to include in my contract a section about copyright and a hold harmless blurb, so they can't come back at me for any reason..
-
A number of lawyers have learned the hard way with their tarnished reputations.
I tend to look at the "tarnished" part a bit differently...They got FREE advertising, their names now appear much higher in the SERP's, which equates to potential clients finding them much easier...Maybe I'm just being the glass is half full type of guy!
:P
(http://www.conversationalcurrency.com/ccwp/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/webtroll-290x300.jpg)