At this juncture, you have three options: (1) continue to ignore these overtures unless and until suit is filed (in which case you would need to respond to avoid default); (2) An IP attorney could respond to this attorney stating that they have been retained to represent you and have future communication handled through them (they would hate that); or (3) you could drag the matter out further volleying generic e-mails back and forth with this lawyer (essentially saying nothing) and see if she just gives up. If the photo attorneys law firm is not based in the state where you live, then it’s highly unlikely that these attorneys are authorized to practice before the local federal courts so they would need to retain another law firm to act as “local counsel” in order to file suit. This will eat into their recovery. Moreover, I am sure Mr. John Doe, the photographer, doesn’t want to come to your state to litigate this case, especially if he lives 10 hours away over 1 photo, removed before asked, and used for only a few months, etc...intentional profiteering scenarios don't apply here and you need to get punished for those. My belief is that the photographer probably told the “photo attorney” I’ll take settlements (e.g., cash payments) but I don’t want to litigate.
You can make a settlement offer, IE $500 to the demanding source if it is driving you crazy, and tell them they can either take the settlement, or you will apply it towards signing a retainer with a local IP attorney and then they could direct all future correspondences to your attorney. You could also advise them that attorney will be the same source to direct any inquiries regarding issues related to any future bankruptcy proceedings you may have and wish them a good day.
I would ask the photo attorney for the actual damages, which they most likely will not provide, and keep asking as without it you cannot make a reasonable settlement and the court are leaning, in innocent/ignorant scenarios where the photo has no relationship to your business, was removed long before you even received a letter demanding it be removed and it was only there a few months, with damages more in line with actual. I would think an offer of 3X the actual damages would be a good reasonable offer, if necessary. With the emergence of cyber fraud I would think that it would be reasonable to ask the photo attorney for a copy of the contract , notarized, showing that shows she in fact has the agency relationship she alleges. Otherwise, how do you know it's legitimate - its reasonable. As I have seen on this site, it is sort of like unintentionally rolling into the back of the car in front of you. The driver of that car says they own the car, but cannot provide a registration. You apologize and offer to pay for the damages out of your pocket and make a settlement. A few days later, the person who was driving that car says the damages are $5000. You are naturally shocked, as this was only a tiny ding and some scratched paint. You ask for a copy of the registration to verify it with their license to make sure it is their car. Otherwise she has no right to mediate a settlement, you also ask for a copy of the collision shop estimate that she says she has. She refuses to provide any of this information. Do you write a check? I wouldn't. If you go to court and she asks for "reasonable" attorney fees, had she provided the information you asked for, which was reasonable and a necessary step to mediate a settlement, there would have been no need for attorney fees. Thus, I would think those fees would be denied, since they weren't reasonable because she was unreasonable in the attempted settlement stages and incurred unreasonable attorney fees relative to the totality of circumstances
Topic: Settlement Offers (Read 9085 times)