ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: Doc on April 02, 2012, 02:05:42 PM
-
Well I got my letter on March 26, 2012.
I had hired a guy who claimed to know how to put together websites. We made an agreement to barter for services. He put together a basic website with an image he chose and said it came from a "free image site". He notified me as of 6/1/11 that my website was up.
I have NO understanding of how to do this. It seemed a good way to help someone and get some help. There was NO formal agreement between myself and this third party, just a "gentlemen's agreement".
Now Getty says that I'm responsible for some $875.00 for the use of "an image represented by Getty Images". And my "website designer" has essentially bailed on me and said he's not responsible. I had NOT yet even approached him about helping out with the demand. I only asked if he had checked on the image before he used it. Apparently that upset him. Anyway, I'm on my own here with absolutely no knowledge of how any of this works. I asked him to remove the image and he took down the whole site. I won't let him back on at this point since, as you could imagine, things are not to good between us.
I have spent parts of several days researching this site and listening to the audio/video's, and I'm not done. By the time this is posted I'll have made a donation.
My 14 day deadline is this Thursday and I need to know should I just send them a certified letter explaining the mistake and that the site was taken down as soon as the potential problem was brought to my attention? Or, can I just give the explanation and then ask them to give me the particulars (proof of copyright, date of infringement, etc.) on the first correspondence? In other words, is there a reason to split this step up. Looks like others are just notifying them of removal and explaining their positions and then waiting to see if they respond before asking for the particulars. Is there a reason for 2 different steps?
How anxious should I be about getting back to them before the 14th day? Should the certified letter reach them by then or is that an arbitrary deadline to get you to act impulsively?
When I google the "title" of the image that was used, it only goes to Getty. Once there, I try to punch in the parameters of the use for image to get an idea of what they would charge to acquire the right to use, and the amount is just under their demand. But I search through their site and find similar images and see they go from $15-40 each. Now these other images are NOT from the same collection. Other sites have similar images ranging from 19-50.
The one that was used for my site was from the Stone Collection, and interestingly any similar images from the stone collection that Getty has, weigh in at about 500-810 per image, depending on parameters of use. I have a theory that I believe coincides with a thought another poster on this site by the name of "buddhapi"(I think?) put out as a possibility. That they wait until there is a good amount of "use" of a particular collection, then go to that collection and in my theory, jack the price just before they send out a new wave of notices. That way no one can use the argument of how little they actually cost and show they are being unreasonable in their demand. In fact it would probably make them look real good since their demand is not that much higher than if you had acquired the rights "correctly". They would appear to be very forgiving by NOT setting the demand so high and putting them in a favorable light should they ever have to go to court. On the other hand, given my current state of distrust, I may be seeing conspiracy all over the place that's not really there.
Also, with regards to the third party who did my website described above, would I have any legal position to ask for reimbursement for the damages, if any, if I have to pay?
Anyway those are my questions so far. Any feedback is appreciated. Thank You for the time and all this info? If nothing else, it has helped give me direction and kept me calm by giving me something to focus on. Even if I do get hit with paying their overpriced demand, at least I can feel good about trying to fight back. Thank you for the empowerment.
Thanx.
-
Another question. I've seen where it's been advised to take down history of one's website at someplace called "archives.org"? (The Wayback Machine)? What is this and how does one do it? Should I get someone more technologically savy to do this? Is there anywhere else I should look to remove this image?
Thanx again.
-
Greetings Doc,
Shame on your web person for not stepping up to the plate.(I'll get to him in a bit..
The deadline is just a scare tactic for the most part, chances are they will not file suit over 1 image, they will just continue to be a thorn in your side.
Explaining the situation will reap zero benefits, it will fall on deaf ears / blind eyes. The reason it is good to ask for registration and other information, such as pricing and what not, as this would show good faith on your part IF it was to land on a judges desk..which is better than ignoring it.
In regards to pricing, images in the "stone collection" are "rights managed", thus they demand a higher price, than royalty free images. It has not been confirmed that this collection is registered or if it is registered correctly without error..but have no fear Getty Images will not give you any of this information anyway..but you'll have it on record.
Keep everything in a file, I think and someone will correct me if i am wrong here, but you may be able to take your "web person" ( and i use that term lightly) to small claims court if you do end up settling. No matter how you look at it you will most likely be a "member of the club" for the next 3 years.. unless you decide to settle with them, but you may not get any of that money back depending on the small claims options..
there is a link on archive.org to remove your cached files, by sending in a request, but there are also other cached versions that Getty has access to..
Hope this helps somewhat, keep reading and learning..if you don't have the stomach to deal with this for the long haul ( 3years) you might consider Oscar's letter program, this will at least stop them from contacting you directly.
-
Thank You for the reply Mr. Buddhapi.
So should I bother with the "archives.org" thing since there are lots of other cached sites and no way of knowing which ones have the content?
I think I'll send them the notice of receiving their letter and my circumstance, even though it won't do any good. At least I can say I tried in the event I ever have to explain it to a Judge. But I'm going to ask them to send me the afore mentioned particulars with that first letter. We'll see what happens.
Thanx again.
-
Personally, I think you need to do more to hold your web designer accountable. If it were me, I think I would likely:
1) demand any fees back that I paid him for the website.
2) offer to let him negotiate/settle with Getty directly
3) let him know in the event you pay any damages or legal fees related to the matter that you would sue him for the appropriate amounts.
some of the "web designers" out there really really irk me. Sorry you had the misfortune of getting mixed up with this clown.
-
Personally, I think you need to do more to hold your web designer accountable. If it were me, I think I would likely:
1) demand any fees back that I paid him for the website.
2) offer to let him negotiate/settle with Getty directly
3) let him know in the event you pay any damages or legal fees related to the matter that you would sue him for the appropriate amounts.
some of the "web designers" out there really really irk me. Sorry you had the misfortune of getting mixed up with this clown.
It's ass hats like this that are giving us a bad name! While I agree with you
I don't think any fees were paid, I think it was a barter deal, and as we know Getty won't deal with the web developer, that will be fruitless.. I fully agree with point 3 , he either step up, or pay later
-
O.K. I'm getting ready to send back a letter to them asking them to provide proof of their claim. But where do I send it? To the address they put down as there letter head or the address they've provided as where you would send a payment if you where paying the demand? The address for payment is a P.O. Box. Does it matter?
Thanx.
-
Doc,
I received my letter a few days after you had received your letter. I sent my reply letter to the address on the letter head, and sent it certified so I would get physical proof of receipt. You cannot send a certified letter to a P.O. Box as there is no one there to sign for it. Good luck.
-
Just reply to the letter on the Getty letterhead(the PO Box) that will get it to where it has to go. You should make sure to look through some (or all) of the material, videos, sample letters, etc that has been posted and accumulated on this site over the 3 1/2 years its been up and running. Good luck!
-
Thanx all. I sent my letter on the 4th, which by my calculation was the day before the "deadline". Looked up the certified tracking and it was delivered on the 11th. Gotta love snail mail. I didn't expect it to get there the next day but I didn't expect a week either. Oh well. Now we wait. I'll let ya know what I hear, if anything. Thanx again.
-
Got their response to my response. I'm taking it (from my reading) that it's about 50-50 about continuing to dialog with these guys? If for no other reason than to show I didn't ignore it and would put me in a little better position on the chance that this did get to a courtroom situation? I guess I'm looking for confirmation (They've generously lowered their offer to $700).
The other thing I wanted to know is, can I jump on Mr. Michelin's defense letter program in the middle of all this if I get tired of dealing with it? Right now I don't mind batting the snail mail back and forth (again, thanks for the continued confidence boost this site gives). But I could see where this could get tiresome as time goes on and may just decide I don't have the time to deal with it anymore.
Thanx again gang, you guys are great.
-
If you don't have the time /stomach for the back and forth with getty, the collection agency they will eventually send it to , and Mr Personality Timothy McCormack ( who is Getty's outside lawyer troll)....Get on with Oscars program and be done with it.
-
Doc, I agree with Buddhapi. If you don't have the time or the desire to continue to play this game with these
extortionists compliance officers as well as the copyright troll Timothy B. McCormack and his settlement demand cohorts, your best bet is to spend the money and let Oscar handle it from there.
If you don't use the Oscar letter optioin, you'll most likely end up spending a lot of time and energy messing with all this, which is fine if you like games and fights and adrenaline rushes. But if you'd prefer a less stress filled three year period, Oscar's your man. :)
-
If you don't use the Oscar letter option, you'll most likely end up spending a lot of time and energy messing with all this, which is fine if you like games and fights and adrenaline rushes. But if you'd prefer a less stress filled three year period, Oscar's your man. :)
There is my smile for the day. Thank you Mulligan!
8)
-
There is my smile for the day. Thank you Mulligan!
8)
And I was thinking I was responsible for that... ???
-
There is my smile for the day. Thank you Mulligan!
8)
And I was thinking I was responsible for that... ???
My friend, YOU are responsible for my daily LAUGH today! Thanks for the PM!
;D ;D ;D
-
Thanx for the replies. I think I'll keep plugging away for now. I'll formulate my response to their response and see what comes of it. I know it's futile, but I think it at least it shows I didn't ignore their correspondence.
They stated they didn't have the copyright for the image in question, and that, that is left up to the artist. They indicate they have a "rights managed" deal. And they don't require their artist to prove they've registered. Of course they refuse to supply me with proof that they have the authority to speak and act on behalf of this image. They state; "Due to confidentiality concerns" they would not supply copies of contributor contracts "at this stage of a claim." They of course invite me to "view image details", lol.
They state "copyright registration is not currently relevant" since their only going for "actual damages and not statutory ones". The first veiled threat of greater threats to come I'm sure. They justify their claim as needing greater compensation because they're "having to enlist additional resources to handle this matter". What, they have to put a .45 stamp on an envelope telling me to stop? Unbelievable.
They state "list prices do not apply once an infringement has been identified". My argument is; list price is not as relevant as much as what you are able to sell something for as a possible starting point of determining how much one has been damaged. Am I right or not? i.e., if you can only sell something for $25 but you claim someone damaged you for $1,000,000.00 don't you have to show how the damage added up to $999,975.00? So the history of the sale price would be significant wouldn't it, regardless of the "list price"?
I've got till May 15th to send the money. Don't think so.
My response is essentially going to be; since they didn't prove to me they have this authority to make this claim, I'm going to have to refuse their offer. I mean really, for all I know, Mr. Tony Stone could knock on my door tomorrow and say the exact same thing and claim no one but he had the authority to represent this image and that I've just been duped, so pay up.
Oh yeah, should I include a counteroffer just to show that I made the effort?
Thanx.
-
Doc, your web designer was highly unprofessional and unethical. What s/he did amounts to malpractice. However, the trolls have trained their scope on you and won't let go even if the designer made a superhuman effort to stop the bullet. I'm a professional graphic artist and I have to tell you that this is a very frustrating situation for an ethical web designer because they really can't do much (if anything) to spare their client the grief even if they wanted to.
In my view (old school, I know), the correct thing to do is to say "I made the mistake, I'm the professional in charge, the buck stops here, and I will cover the damage my mistake did to you even if I have to mow your lawn for posterity." That's the way I think about my clients and you know what I get in return? Unwavering support and loyalty because they know I got their back and I would never hose them. I bet if your designer said "mea culpa" and worked with you on this, you would consider him a fellow victim instead of a graphics troll. That person will not do well in this business, trust me. Word gets around when you burn the people who hire you.
One idea I'm getting about this situation is that I need to create a clause in my work agreement that specifically addresses the responsibilities assigned to each party regarding the stewardship of copyright information. It's now obvious that one has to be perfectly clear about who owns what and who's liable for what when handing content that is basically a legal hand grenade because of the copyright trolls.
The idea is to protect all parties from the trolls, and to seat responsibilities squarely where they belong. If a client hands me an image that I know does not belong to them and they insist I use it on a work of theirs, I have no choice but to refuse because I want to keep my hands "clean", and because I do believe it is my OBLIGATION to protect a fellow artists' property.
I also think it is my OBLIGATION to stop the trolls. What these "extortion letter farms" are doing is not copyright protection, it's extortion, it's bullying, it's instilling fear in people (I am stopping just shy of the "T" word) and it's pure unadulterated greed based on a cynical plan to distort a well-meaning and necessary law into a profit center for otherwise untalented legal and collection "professionals".
-
If they came down to $700, then you could counter with $699.98 and they might take that, but I'd bet a dime to a doughnut that any counter less than that would be rejected.
Doc, the problem is that reasonable people think they're dealing with reasonable people when the Getty Game begins with their initial letter.
But you quickly learn the hard way that these copyright trolls don't settle matters reasonably like rational people, and they have boilerplate responses to anything you have to say.
This game is all about money, big money, and I view what they're doing as cowardly mugging without a firearm or physical confrontation on their part.
It's the worst kind of bullying, and, as far as I'm concerned, they don't deserve any payment beyond the sweat off of S.G's bal... well, modesty forbids me from completing this image.
With that said, offering $200 seems to be an amount many people use, and it's also a figure Getty will most likely reject. But if the case ever did go to court, you would then have proof that you made a fair and reasonable counter offer to their absurdly inflated $700.
Swapping letters with them is like swapping spit with a vampire -- not much satisfaction to be had... unless, again, you enjoy playing this sort of game and have the time and energy to do so.
-
Good discussion here!
@ Moe - I have had several clients get letters ( no doing of mine as developer) and I simply gave them a hosting credit and had them hire Oscar, so it did not "cost" them anything, and I come off as being honest, reputable and willing to go to any lenght for my clients. ( Which I might add I am in every respect). You are correct this "designer" will not go or last long in this business.. I have also adjusted my contract accordingly in regards to copyright issues, as well as I always explain to new client what is going on so they are aware of the pitfalls...
@Mulligan - thanx for the image! :o
-
Thanx gang. I plan on action towards my "web designer" but I want to focus on resolving the issue first. I suggested that he take responsibility for his actions but he continued to deny any. He did suggest initially that I do an internet search about the issue which is what led me to this site. I wonder if he monitors this site at all and has put 2 & 2 together? Probably not, but I'd be curious of his thoughts on here with peers able to evaluate his position. Oh well.
I sent my response to Getty's second letter explaining to them why I won't pay their ransom, and offering $200 without admission of guilt to get the mess of my plate. I suspect they won't accept it as everyone on here has indicated, but we'll see.
I got to thinking, and this idea may have already been broached, is Getty a publicly traded entity? If so, would a letter writing campaign to shareholders maybe make a difference? If all they are focused on is the bottom line, then getting the shareholders stirred up may have an effect. Or, purchasing one share of voting stock, and making some noise at their shareholders meetings could also bring pressure to bear. Just a thought. Thanx again everybody.
-
I got to thinking, and this idea may have already been broached, is Getty a publicly traded entity? If so, would a letter writing campaign to shareholders maybe make a difference? If all they are focused on is the bottom line, then getting the shareholders stirred up may have an effect. Or, purchasing one share of voting stock, and making some noise at their shareholders meetings could also bring pressure to bear. Just a thought. Thanx again everybody.
My experience with shareholders (limited, admittedly, but cynically forged from plenty of reading and life observation) is that they want as much return as possible at dividend time and would just as soon not know where that money comes from.
Near as I can tell, letter writing campaigns, online petitions, and things like Walk Against Getty are a total waste of time.
If you want to make noise about the Getty Images and Timothy B. McCormack Law Firm copyright trolling, settlement demand, and speculative invoicing scheme, your time would be better spent contributing as much as you can to ELI or else write a polished piece that will go viral.
-
First off, regarding the web designer. It is mostly a waste of time there. You can't really go after him unless someone successfully "nabs you". He could have offered to help pay for Oscar's defense letter fee or help get educated which is what most conscientious web designers have done. It is the fast, most effective way to get them off your back.
If your web designer doesn't change his ways, he will put himself out of business. It isn't hard to take down a web designer and hurt their reputation. You place their name on the ELI forums and tell your story how he operates and he will have a nice little Google entry ranked very high. There is your easy, low cost payback.
Regarding the Getty being publicly traded, it was bought out in 2008 by private equity investors. So most of the information that are required to be publicly revealed is no longer happening. There are LOTS you can do to public companies because PR is important and there are many stakeholders and shareholders in public companies. That is why some companies decide to go private to escape the scrutiny. That is why many public companies ultimately lose their founders. Going public isn't always good because of the accountability they have and the transparency they have to keep up.
I got my letter in 2008 and I did investigate Getty's public company status. I was disappointed that Getty had been "taken private" because I do believe that ELI and this online campaign could have been more damaging to Getty over time. Private equity investors don't care too much about PR issues because most are hidden away by layers for corporate structures. They only care about returns which the extortion letter program is successfully producing. CEO Jonathan Klein and his underlings are pretty much as far as you can go in terms of hitting back at someone and putting pressure on them.
As I discussed before, the Corporate Counsel team are all lawyers and they all stay low key. You can expect nearly all Getty employees want to stay out of the public light regarding this issue also. They don't want their names printed in relation to this. It is the ugly underbelly of their business.
Thanx gang. I plan on action towards my "web designer" but I want to focus on resolving the issue first. I suggested that he take responsibility for his actions but he continued to deny any. He did suggest initially that I do an internet search about the issue which is what led me to this site. I wonder if he monitors this site at all and has put 2 & 2 together? Probably not, but I'd be curious of his thoughts on here with peers able to evaluate his position. Oh well.
I sent my response to Getty's second letter explaining to them why I won't pay their ransom, and offering $200 without admission of guilt to get the mess of my plate. I suspect they won't accept it as everyone on here has indicated, but we'll see.
I got to thinking, and this idea may have already been broached, is Getty a publicly traded entity? If so, would a letter writing campaign to shareholders maybe make a difference? If all they are focused on is the bottom line, then getting the shareholders stirred up may have an effect. Or, purchasing one share of voting stock, and making some noise at their shareholders meetings could also bring pressure to bear. Just a thought. Thanx again everybody.
-
Drinking to much of the Getty Kool-Aid is bad for ones complexion .
http://palmbeachdns.com/john_BA.jpg
Disclaimer: The above original image is available for download, and is shown here as a parody stritcly for entertainment purposes.
-
Brilliant Buddhapi. Solid concept and a very professional execution. I would have to call this parody a perfect example of Fair Use.
-
O.K. so I posted my original situation, responded, they sent second letter offering lower amount, I responded with counter offer, and now I've got my first "escalation" letter.
It is essentially a one page demand letter similar to their first one. They don't acknowledge receipt of the second correspondence and my counter offer. I'm assuming their ignoring my counter offer.
So since it doesn't say anything new and they still haven't supplied me with the documentation supporting their position I was just planning to send them another copy of my second letter since there is nothing new to discuss.
I did finally find the image in question on the copyright sight someone posted in another thread. It's listed under a different title. I had to find it by using the artist's name. It's interesting that it is the only image that pulls up when I entered the artist's name. I expected to have to wade through a bunch of images to find out if the one in question was registered.
So from what I can gather here, I can expect a series of these escalation letters and then notifications from their attorney(s)? To these notices, I'm assuming I should respond essentially the same as I have regarding asking them for their supporting documents until they are supplied, take me to court, or stop bothering me? Is this pretty much what will go on for the next three years or so? You'd think these people would have better things to do with their time.
Hope you all had a Great Memorial weekend and if you haven't done so, it's never too late to thank a vet for their service.
-
As an update from my last post, re-sent them previous copy of my counter offer. They just sent me another letter stating that they won't be sending me anymore information then what they've already sent. They refused the counter offer and feel their offer was "fair". They end with having noted my position and will let me know of the "next steps". Que ominous sounding music......
At this point I don't see any reason to contact them again as they will not give me proof of their position. I don't want to appear to ignore them but it seems fruitless to continue to engage in dialog that is obviously going nowhere. Any thoughts?
Thanx everybody.
-
I'm in no position to advise you of what to do, I know what I would do tho..
I would go read this thread, and see if this could fit into your plan of action..
http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/getty-images-timothy-mccormack-the-washington-state-attorney-general/
-
You are right it is fruitless at this point to continue the conversation with them. I basically told them we have nothing to discuss unless they provide me with all the proof I have asked for. I have completed and am ready to send off letters to the Attorney General’s Office in Washington State and Ohio State (Where I reside) as well as to the BBB. I have received my fourth letter stating that if I don’t pay the matter could be escalated to their legal department, if I get a letter from good ol’ Timmy and still have not been provided with all of the documentation I have asked for I will fire off complaint letters about him to all of the above along with the State Bar Associations of the three states where he is licensed. I am done talking with them until they prove we have something to discuss.
You have to decide what is best for you and your situation though, hang in there and please keep us posted.
-
Thanx Buddapi. I have read that post before. I must have misread it. I was taking it as waiting until they had forwarded it to McCormick, NCS, whoever, et al, then sending complaints to the AG regarding those entities. I see now your suggesting that I do it with Getty right now and also again with those others as they become involved in the situation. A sort of shoot everybody and collect names later kind of attitude. I like it.
Thanx again.
@KeepFighting, thanx for the confirmation and encouragement.
-
Hi Everyone. It's been a while since I've posted but I have been keeping up.
Anyway, I got the shyster's letter about my alleged Getty situation. It was NOT sent registered, just normal mail. The new shake down is for $1400. I'm not worried and I'm not paying. So my question is do I respond? I've already outlined what I would need from Getty to consider their demand and they've refused. I offered a counter offer of $200 and again, they refused. Since they can't/won't prove their claim obviously I'm not paying. Without registration proving this new demand was delivered I'm inclined to ignore and not respond.
I'm really not interested in engaging with this guy until absolutely necessary, ie;when he sends a registered demand.
I haven't ignored Getty and I made it clear that without the aforementioned materials that I couldn't consider their claim. So I see no value of engaging until I get that info. and I don't see it my responsibility to inform the shyster of what I've already said. He belongs to them, let them tell him what has transpired.
Thoughts?
Thanx.
-
I don't think I would worry about it.
However, if you want them to stay on point or get off your back, you might respond with something about, "The continued unfounded claims being tossed at you by multiple parties constitutes harassment." Let them know you have already responded and are awaiting proof of their claim. Let them know that if the harassment doesn't stop, you will be going after them. If you have a reputable attorney that you do business with, it would always be a good idea to cc him on the letter.
Sometimes these guys tend to chase their marks in multiple ways which really can be harassing. Not only might they come at you themselves, but with an attorney, and sometimes with a bill collector. You might put that to bed by letting them know that you are not interested in their harassment tactics. "Cease and desist" so to speak.
-
was it ass-hat Timothy McCormack??? if it were me I would respond as Stinger suggests, but also include that you will be drafting a letter to the Washington Attorney General as well as the Washington bar Association if he continues to contact you..then follow thru with that if he contacts you again..the more people that file complaints the more likely someone will notice some day and do something about it..
-
I would let them know that you have nothing further to discuss unless proof of claim is provided and if you hear from them again you will file complaints against Getty and the shyster with the Washington State Attorney's General Office, the BBB, the FTC your Congressman and Senator as well as the Bar Association for the Shyster and Lisa Wilmer (Getty's legal beagle).
-
I would let them know that you have nothing further to discuss unless proof of claim is provided and if you hear from them again you will file complaints against Getty and the shyster with the Washington State Attorney's General Office, the BBB, the FTC your Congressman and Senator as well as the Bar Association for the Shyster and Lisa Wilmer (Getty's legal beagle).
I like beagles, they are cute and cuddly....Lisa Wilmer??? Not so much
-
Yeah it was Uncle Timmy. Sorry I should have been more specific. I forgot how many shyster's Getty owns.
-
Yeah it was Uncle Timmy. Sorry I should have been more specific. I forgot how many shyster's Getty owns.
Well Timothy B. McCormack is Getty's goto collection lawyer...
-
I would let them know that you have nothing further to discuss unless proof of claim is provided and if you hear from them again you will file complaints against Getty and the shyster with the Washington State Attorney's General Office, the BBB, the FTC your Congressman and Senator as well as the Bar Association for the Shyster and Lisa Wilmer (Getty's legal beagle).
I would be curious to see if a letter with Greg's comments would get Timmy to go away, or if he will continue to see how many complaints he can stack up with the AG, FTC and BBB. Hard to tell with these types, but my guess is that he would get the message and send it back to Getty.
-
I would let them know that you have nothing further to discuss unless proof of claim is provided and if you hear from them again you will file complaints against Getty and the shyster with the Washington State Attorney's General Office, the BBB, the FTC your Congressman and Senator as well as the Bar Association for the Shyster and Lisa Wilmer (Getty's legal beagle).
@DOC if you decide to go this route you might want to include in your letter ALL of McCormacks letters that we have to date..I think there are several letters, including 6-8 complaints to the Attorney General..I sure the Bar Association and Attorney General would like to see, many, many cases and pages at one time, in one neat package. Who knows it might just get them to take a closer look.
I would be curious to see if a letter with Greg's comments would get Timmy to go away, or if he will continue to see how many complaints he can stack up with the AG, FTC and BBB. Hard to tell with these types, but my guess is that he would get the message and send it back to Getty.
-
I also forgot to mention that if you do file the Bar Complaints against Mr. McCormack make sure to do it with the Bar Associations in Washington, Oregon and Idaho states as these are all the states he is licensed to practice in. Should anyone who has received a McCormack letter decide this is what they want here is some additional info.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Washington State Bar Association
1325 Fourth Ave., Ste. 600
Seattle, WA 98101-2539
Office of Disciplinary Counsel
206-727-8207 | [email protected]
--------------------------------------------------------
Idaho State Bar Association
PO Box 895
Boise, ID 83701
Phone: (208) 334-4500
Fax Numbers: (208) 334-4515 or (208) 334-2764
Idaho State Bar Association: http://www.isb.idaho.gov/
Contact Info: http://www.isb.idaho.gov/general/contactisb.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon State Bar Association
P.O. Box 231935
Tigard, OR 97281-1935
Oregon State Bar Association: http://www.osbar.org/
Contact Info: http://www.osbar.org/contact.html
Phone:
(503) 620-0222 or Inside Oregon: 1 (800) 452-8260
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I have my letters all ready to go but Mr. McCormack hasn't sent me a letter so I can't file my complaints against him and Lisa Wilmer. :(
Merry Christmas Mr. McCormack