ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: idtaz on February 24, 2017, 08:09:33 PM
-
I recently received a letter from Getty asking for $XXX for an image on my website. Immediately took it down. For the last few hours, I've found:
- Getty says the image is "Rights-managed" and has a link to the photographer's portfolio within Getty Images. Clicking that link, and looking at the photographer's portfolio within Getty Images -- in its entirety, for five times -- the image isn't listed.
- I also went to the photographer's website. Image isn't shown there, either.
Question 1: Is this apparent lack of ownership of the image relevant?
Question 2: I can't afford to pay the $XXX extortion amount, but I am prepared to send repeated (and polite) emails asking that they reduce the fee, provided they can show proof of rights management, contract and sales history for this specific image. Without full and complete documentation, no monies will be paid. Does that sound fair/productive?
Question 3: Would it be wise to just contact the photographer?
Thanks in advance!
(P.S. I apologize for the anonymity. Only reason for it: I prefer not to be identifiable to Getty Images at this time).
-
1. Yes. I wouldn't pay for anything unless I had the proof of claim. It doesn't mean that can't sue you though.
2. If you ask for proof, they already have a response, usually something in the lines of "we will only provide it in court". They might reduce the fee, but being that it's only three digits, it seems unlikely. The downside to this strategy is they know you're worried and want to pay to make this "go away". That is the lifeblood of this tactic.
3. I wouldn't contact the photographer. The reason being, they get a cut of the settlement and it seems most of them are pretty stingy when it comes to "infringement" issues anyway. Not worth your time, and if they actually did take you to court, I wouldn't want comments made to the photographer being used against me.
I got one of there letters too, asking $2500 to settle (for one image) so you're not alone. I didn't negotiate a lower price, but I did send them an email asking for proof. They sent a reply email, which is verbatim to what others have posted here, that any documents produced would be done so in court. My lawyer was CC's on my email to them, he told me he sent a letter just asking future correspondences be sent to his firm and that I should just let him deal with it. Once he saw the letter, he was surprised I didn't want to settle but I took this personal (not always the smartest thing to do, but I don't really care). The image they said I "infringed on" came from my watch collecting blog which is sacred to me. I set it up to share my time pieces, discuss the industry, etc. It was something I enjoyed and I have a group of friends who also take part in it. It was never meant for copyright trolls looking for easy income, especially over an image that was not being being used, it was just left on the images folder that came with the template. So far, we have not heard anything and it's been about six months since my lawyer sent his letter.
I have not seen any lawsuits from these people over one image. I would like to provide a donation to anyone in this situation, I find it incredibly predatory and petty.
-
1) absolutely. There are reports of images that former contributors to Getty took down from Getty, and Getty is still making extortion letters money on them. There are public domain images that anyone can display as long as they please, that Getty sends scare demands on. And so on.
Maybe yours is not one of them, and maybe it is. Ownership is definitely relevant.
2) many people have done negotiations way down, many have not. Your choice.
3) same as 2). It is possible, but not certain, that the photographer buys all the crap that Getty says. It is also possible they don't know Getty is making money in their name. (Money they don't see)