ELI Forums > Getty Images Letter Forum

Pixsy Letter (photographer has history of suing)

<< < (3/9) > >>

Xiaozz:
SAME CASE HERE! I’m in the US. I got email from Pixsy, they asked me 400 for a pic I put on my website longtime ago, a very not clear pic I searched from google( absolutely I searched free image....). My website is shut down long time ago btw. In the email, He didn’t even introduce his full name all he wants is money or else he will let his attorney to keep up with me. My first reaction was “this is a scam”. Then I replied him that he can’t charge me for a pic that I never even used plus my website is shutdown I never used the pics. He literally just copied the info on their website about copyright infringement. Then I realize this is a blackmail. :) I asked him for the copyright info(Meanwhile I did reaserch of the copyright, no data shows in the US.  I get really pissed that there are some people make money by fooling innocents, it’s not ethical at all. Never mention he replied my email at 4:30am. What type of office open at 4:30? Then I told him I’m not gonna make any payment for a pic I never used and I won’t use at, also followed email to a friend who’s a lawyer, the guy prom Pixsy said to my friend that “Could you please explain to your client that copyright is a strict liability offense. That use of any imagery found online almost always and with very few exceptions must be licensed prior to use.
And that, since our client, the copyright owner of the image, did not receive a request for permission to use the image in question, your client has infringed the owner’s copyright and a license fee is therefore due.”

Here’s something more interesting. I contact the photographer asked him about if the person from Pixsy is real, he replied me said that “Pixsy is the law firm represent me,bla bla bla,  they charge less than I thought, normally I charge 1000-2000 a photo.....”
Lollllllll

Anyway, I wonder how you guys handled them, I honestly don’t think they can do anything expect bluffing and blackmailing.

UnfairlyTargeted:
So, why do I say photos are worth very little?  Check this out:
http://www.microstockposts.com/istock-contributors-furious-over-new-royalty-of-2-cents/

So if a piece of shit like Schwabel sells photos on Getty (he does), then he's accepted that he'll be paid TWO CENTS per license.  If you get a letter from this royal piece of trash or any other Pixsy trash and you feel you must reply, offer two cents, but tell him that your hourly rate to verify his claim is at least minimum wage.  Since you will spend more than a minute or two reading his crappy email, then he now owes you for your time, which exceeded two cents.

Write ripoffreports and bad reviews of these fucktards and move on with your life.  They don't deserve the time of day.

As to the anger, maybe if your reputation is dragged through the toilet for a few years, your criminal record is dragged up and sent to all of your clients, sponsors, friends, employers, and customers, you're audited constantly because someone keeps tipping the IRS off that you're taking your extortion money under the table, then maybe you will think twice about writing an email over a stupid fucking image on the internet.  One that's no different than a million other images on the internet that are free.

DavidVGoliath:

--- Quote from: UnfairlyTargeted on August 13, 2018, 01:41:33 PM ---So, why do I say photos are worth very little?  Check this out:
http://www.microstockposts.com/istock-contributors-furious-over-new-royalty-of-2-cents/
--- End quote ---

You're quoting someone saying they're quitting iStock because of low royalty rates. Not exactly helping your case.


--- Quote from: UnfairlyTargeted on August 13, 2018, 01:41:33 PM ---So if a piece of shit like Schwabel sells photos on Getty (he does), then he's accepted that he'll be paid TWO CENTS per license.
--- End quote ---

Nope. The percentage of revenue paid to iStock contributors is between 10 - 20%. Now I'm not going to argue that $0.02 is anything other than an abysmally low cut for anyone to get for their work, especially since that means it would have been an image licensed for $0.20 or $0.40. Those sort of revenue splits happen when iStock gets a monthly payment from one of their subscription clients; the ones who pay several hundred or thousand dollars per month to iStock and get to use a fixed number of images during that period. In other situations, an iStock contributor might make significantly more money depending on the license e.g. if it's a one-time purchase for a wide swathe of rights.

Conversely, there are other photographers who self-manage, employ agents, or work with boutique agencies who charge very high fees for licenses. This is particularly true in the cutthroat world of celebrity and entertainment images, where a good exclusive shot (or series) can command five, six or even seven-figure fees.


--- Quote from: UnfairlyTargeted on August 13, 2018, 01:41:33 PM ---If you get a letter from this royal piece of trash or any other Pixsy trash and you feel you must reply, offer two cents, but tell him that your hourly rate to verify his claim is at least minimum wage.  Since you will spend more than a minute or two reading his crappy email, then he now owes you for your time, which exceeded two cents.
--- End quote ---

I said in a previous post: Pixsy is just a tool that can be used to verify if an image is being used under license or not. I personally use Pixsy on occasion to see what's out there but have never used their claims handling process.

My own photographs are routinely licensed for three and four-figure sums, and I can (and have) proven this during legal proceedings - so I guarantee you that myself, and many of my peers, absolutely have our ducks in a row when we initiate infringement claims, and if someone tried to counter with an $0.02 offer, I'd likely move to file at court fairly rapidly.

Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi):
not to mention the vast difference in pricing between "royalty free" and "rights managed" images..

UnfairlyTargeted:
Uh, Schwabel still has images with Getty.  So that sack of shit has agreed to two cents per image.

As to images selling for hundreds, thousands, millions of dollars...  please show me some examples.  I'm curious how these are so different and better than what's free.

As to someone using a Pixsy troll's image and saying it must have value because someone used it...  maybe someone thought the image was the correct one for the price... free... not knowing that it had been seeded by Schwabel to trap them into an extortion scheme.  I certainly wouldn't pay for that shit.  It's like beer.  I'll drink a Bud Light if it's free.  But if I have to pay I'll find something better than piss water.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version