Has anyone heard anything or have an update on the suit filed against Getty last fall for copyright infringement over Getty’s use of the tree shaped auto air fresheners in a few of their images. I remember reading about that awhile back but haven’t seen anything more on it here. I know Getty was trying to have the suit dismissed. It was good to see them get a taste of their own medicine.
Has anyone heard anything or have an update on the suit filed against Getty last fall for copyright infringement over Getty’s use of the tree shaped auto air fresheners in a few of their images. I remember reading about that awhile back but haven’t seen anything more on it here. I know Getty was trying to have the suit dismissed. It was good to see them get a taste of their own medicine.
I'll check out the status when I'm in digging around pacer tomorrow, and try to give an update..
Thanks for the idea, McFilms... lol...
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/8227/catsvsdogswarofthetroll.jpg
S.G.
Here's an update on the Car Freshener v. Getty lawsuit. Getty's initial motion to dismiss was denied in 2011. Car Freshener's lawyers have written the court complaining that Getty has refuse to provide initial discovery that would let them know if they have the right entities or if others have to be brought in. They also allege that Getty has been difficult in revealing the exact relationship they have with their photographers. They are also objecting to certain documents they want that Getty wants to label confidential. The court has authorized them to file a motion if they cannot work these issues out with Getty. Getty responded to that filing by of course denying they were being difficult and stating that CF's lawyers are asking for burdensome information which they cannot retrieve (like they want every image that has the tree, a portion of the tree, an obscured view of the tree, etc etc) They said they are willing to continue to try and resolve these issues with CF's lawyers. They are also fighting over where to take the deposition of Getty personnel. Getty wants it done in Seattle and the plaintiffs want it done in NY. Both sides agreed that having a settlement conference in front of a federal magistrate would be helpful. One of the sticking points it appears in the settlement talks is that Getty wants to be able to continue to sell the images. The terms of this proposed on-going business agreement appear to be what's holding up the settlement. The court set August 21, 2012 at 3PM as the time for the next court conference. The documents can be viewed on PACER. The case is pending in the Northern District of NY under Index No. 09 cv 01252.