ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: mikejl46 on July 23, 2012, 05:15:06 PM
-
Getty Images sent me paperwork that shows an image they claim is on my website, but I cant find the image any place on my site. I'm not sure what to do now, since I cant fine the image to remove.
Do I need to ask them to send me a link to the page that they say the image is on?
I plan on not responding to any of their letters, What would be the end result If I totally ignore their letter?
Thanks,
Mike
-
Read thru the forums, the answers lie within...as for the image, I suggest you ftp into the server and look thru every directory, it's in there somewhere, perhaps on an old outdated / unused page..
-
Did they send you a screen capture of the image in question being used on your site? If so, that could give you a clue as to which page and when they "found the infringement". Usually the screen capture shows the date somewhere on the image — IF they sent you something that's legible. They tend to send very sketchy information about the alleged infringement.
BuddhaPi is right. Read through the forum and you'll find you have several options. Ignoring them is an option, but there's a risk that they'll take legal action against you if you ignore them.
It would be helpful if you could contribute your Getty letter to Matthew so that he can post it to this forum and the community can comment. Each letter is a bit different and each situation has its own nuances that need to be considered. His email can be found on the front page of this website.
-
Read thru the forums, the answers lie within...as for the image, I suggest you ftp into the server and look thru every directory, it's in there somewhere, perhaps on an old outdated / unused page..
Thanks Robert
I will give that a try.
-
Did they send you a screen capture of the image in question being used on your site?
They sent me the image and a screen capture, but the screen capture does not show the image.
-
hahha, what a bunch of ass-hats! they can't even check to make sure the image is even there..they have no case if they can't even show you the image in use..look for the image and tell them to pound salt..
Did they send you a screen capture of the image in question being used on your site?
They sent me the image and a screen capture, but the screen capture does not show the image.
-
I agree with Robert, if they can't even produce a screen capture I would tell them to buzz off. It's bad enough that they will not provide proof of exclusive rights to the images as they claim and now not even provide an image. This may give us an idea of how many of these letters that they are cranking out on a daily basis if they can't even be bothered to make sure that there is image included with the screen capture. What a bunch of losers!
SG, I think this one might deserve a special picture ::)
quote author=Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) link=topic=3083.msg10294#msg10294 date=1343083524]
hahha, what a bunch of ass-hats! they can't even check to make sure the image is even there..they have no case if they can't even show you the image in use..look for the image and tell them to pound salt..
Did they send you a screen capture of the image in question being used on your site?
They sent me the image and a screen capture, but the screen capture does not show the image.
[/quote]
-
I looked through all 1600 images on my site and can not find it anywhere.
Is it ok to post a screen shot of the screen shot they sent me?
-
would be better if you emailed the letter and screen capture to Matthew, he'll redact your personal information, then we can all comment on it, and have it in our document library..
I looked through all 1600 images on my site and can not find it anywhere.
Is it ok to post a screen shot of the screen shot they sent me?
-
I figured it out. There is a 400 x343 screen capture image of a website template on my website. In the top header section of that template there is some clouds.
The image they claim I have on my website is an image that shows a building under construction. I notice in the sky above the building under construction image there is some clouds that look similar. and with a closer look, there is a small section of clouds from the building under construction image that look very similar to the top header section of the web site template screen capture, so about 1/8 part of the sky in the building under construction image might be in the web template screen capture image on my website.
So for sure their search bot found the image. The human eye would have never notice. They look like any clouds you would see in the sky.
I have now removed that image from my website.
I have also read through the "A Summary of the Getty Issue in the United States" section of this site and I guess the best option for me is to ignore the letter.
This web site has been very helpful.
Thanks again
Mike
-
We'd love to see this image. This is going to be the newest running joke if in fact they are sending letters over photos of clouds! It is true that no two photos of a cloud scene can ever be the same.... but give me a freaking break. What is so darn special about these clouds? The buildings with the clouds?
-
We'd love to see this image. This is going to be the newest running joke if in fact they are sending letters over photos of clouds! It is true that no two photos of a cloud scene can ever be the same.... but give me a freaking break. What is so darn special about these clouds? The buildings with the clouds?
I can email you the images they sent me of their image and screen capture,
or should I post them here?
-
Post them here. I want to see the damn clouds!!
-
You can email matt30060 at gmail and I can post it.
I can email you the images they sent me of their image and screen capture,
or should I post them here?
-
@ Mike you mention template, are you referring to a template from template monster? IF so TM settled with Getty and will supposedly handle this for you as part of the settlement agreement..
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but I also believe that Getty was caught in the past trying to double dip but collecting from TM and TM's users.
@ Mike you mention template, are you referring to a template from template monster? IF so TM settled with Getty and will supposedly handle this for you as part of the settlement agreement..
-
yup...since they are so organized, they would send out letter to template monster customers..if the customers did not know any better, they would collect, while they already collected on the settlement.. They would also try to collect if the TM customer did not have a receipt in hand.
It's always guilty until proven innocent with Getty Images.
-
@ Mike you mention template, are you referring to a template from template monster? IF so TM settled with Getty and will supposedly handle this for you as part of the settlement agreement..
It was not purchased from Template Monster, but was purchased from some company, I don't remember which one, it's been so long ago.
Getty found part of their image in a image of a template displayed on my website. That's just crazy.
-
Welcome the world of make believe and merry go rounds!
@ Mike you mention template, are you referring to a template from template monster? IF so TM settled with Getty and will supposedly handle this for you as part of the settlement agreement..
It was not purchased from Template Monster, but was purchased from some company, I don't remember which one, it's been so long ago.
Getty found part of their image in a image of a template displayed on my website. That's just crazy.
-
I plan on not responding to any of their letters, What would be the end result If I totally ignore their letter?
I received “the letter” from Getty and here’s what I did. I looked up the US internet copyright rules at:
http://copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html
and click on “§ 512. Limitations on liability relating to material online” Go to about the 6th page of this document where it says:
(g) REPLACEMENT OF REMOVED OR DISABLED MATERIAL AND LIMITATION ON OTHER LIABILITY.—
(1) NO LIABILITY FOR TAKING DOWN GENERALLY. — Subject to paragraph (2), a service provider shall not be liable to any person for any claim based on the service provider’s good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material or activity claimed to be infringing or based on facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent, regardless of whether the material or activity is ultimately determined to be infringing
I sent this to Getty with a cover letter telling them to read the friggin law and don’t contact me again. Haven’t heard from them. DON’T FALL FOR THIS EXTORTION !!!
-
This section refers to the third party liability of service providers.
The best defense against Getty has always been their lack of legal standing in regards to ownership of the actual content.
If they won't provide proof of their claims, tell them to piss off.
It's easy... it doesn't need to be difficult.
Read the forum, guys.
S.G.
-
This portion of the law relates directly to a "service provider" and not directly to the infringer..in other words if you were hosting your site with me, and you improperly used a copyrighted image, YOU would be responsible, not me as I am only the service provider.. Chances are good you will get another letter at some point..
It's my opinion that everyday people should never try to out lawyer them by quoting specific areas of the law, it can be confusing and come back to bite you..
I plan on not responding to any of their letters, What would be the end result If I totally ignore their letter?
I received “the letter” from Getty and here’s what I did. I looked up the US internet copyright rules at:
http://copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html
and click on “§ 512. Limitations on liability relating to material online” Go to about the 6th page of this document where it says:
(g) REPLACEMENT OF REMOVED OR DISABLED MATERIAL AND LIMITATION ON OTHER LIABILITY.—
(1) NO LIABILITY FOR TAKING DOWN GENERALLY. — Subject to paragraph (2), a service provider shall not be liable to any person for any claim based on the service provider’s good faith disabling of access to, or removal of, material or activity claimed to be infringing or based on facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent, regardless of whether the material or activity is ultimately determined to be infringing
I sent this to Getty with a cover letter telling them to read the friggin law and don’t contact me again. Haven’t heard from them. DON’T FALL FOR THIS EXTORTION !!!
-
ah you beat me to it!!
it's one thing to "read the law" which differs from understanding it!
This section refers to the third party liability of service providers.
The best defense against Getty has always been their lack of legal standing in regards to ownership of the actual content.
If they won't provide proof of their claims, tell them to piss off.
It's easy... it doesn't need to be difficult.
Read the forum, guys.
S.G.
-
I'm with S.G. on the strategy with Getty. They have no legal standing unless they prove they do. Not paying a settlement based on their poorly substantiated claim is the most reasonable response anyone could have. Without proof of their legal standing, the letter amounts to snail mail phishing.
-
Here is the a pic of the image and screen shot Getty sent me.
The screen shot they have is a screen shot of a website template that someone else created.
-
Wow. Getty's new motto:
"We Copyright the Sky"
©2012 Getty Images
If it were me, I'd write them back and say, "Good One. I thought I had really infringed. Just for fun, please send me the proof of registration and the agreement with the photographer." Then I'd leave it at that.
Can you imagine them suing for this? I believe they'd be laughed out of court.
-
That's a good one Jerry and to go along with their new motto they should play the Rolling Stones song "Get off of My Cloud" :)
Wow. Getty's new motto:
"We Copyright the Sky"
©2012 Getty Images
If it were me, I'd write them back and say, "Good One. I thought I had really infringed. Just for fun, please send me the proof of registration and the agreement with the photographer." Then I'd leave it at that.
Can you imagine them suing for this? I believe they'd be laughed out of court.
-
Behind those buildings I think there is an ocean. There is a photographer taking a picture of the ocean and he happens to have clouds that look the same in his image and maybe his images are free. I think that is what happened. I feel better now.
-
At the scale you show the only similarity is the clouds and they don't look like the same image. I think Getty would have a hard time winning a case where they are claiming that all photos of puffy clouds fall under their copyright.
If I were you I would super-impost the images just to verify they are not the same. (I'd do it myself but the screenshot is small.)
-
I did an image search of the template screen shot they claim is a getty image and there was 250 results of websites using the exact same web template I purchased. They are still up and running. They must not have got their letter yet.
-
Out of curiosity, how do the clouds in the image compare? I suspect that picscout's image search triggered on the three little "puffs" between the two big clouds. If I were writing an algorithm that might be enough to send a human to look to see if your image might be photoshopped with a portion taken from theirs. But -- at the scale you displayed, the large clouds did not resemble each other in the two images.
-
.
-
How long does it take to get the second letter? Havent heard from Getty since July 23rd.
-
There is no rhyme or reason sometime like 3 months..but have no fear they have not forgotten you.