ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: rock on June 20, 2012, 10:16:31 AM
-
United States Telephone Recording Laws
http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm#The US Federal Law
from the website:
The U.S. federal law allows recording of phone calls and other electronic communications with the consent of at least one party to the call.
Recording Telephone Calls with Parties in Different Jurisdictions
Federal law may apply when the conversation is between parties who are in different states, although it is unsettled whether a court will hold in a given case that federal law "pre-empts" state law, but either state may choose to enforce its own laws. Therefore it is better to err on the side of caution when recording an interstate telephone call.
I would NEVER enter in a legal conversation with a collection lawyer over the phone.
I will not get upset, and tell my caller:
1-I do not know who is calling, (even if it is the IRS) and I will not answer any question.
2- I ask them to send me everything in writing by regular mail ( and not email)
3- I will NOT give them my legal name, address, email address, or any information, they could be SCAMMERS
(it is there problem to figure that)
4- I will not volunteer any information
5- I will ask them not to call me anymore
6 -IT IS MY RIGHT
if they keep calling me, and harrassing me, I will file a complaint with the attorney general , I will make it a public record for everyone to use as possible class action lawsuit.
-
I've seen this written a few times that postal mail is preferred over email. Not sure why this is - is it because emails may sometimes get spammed or are emails still admissible when it comes to court? Thus far I've used a combination of email and letter when corresponding to Getty as they have also done the same.
-
why make it easier on them to extract your money? let them purchase paper and stamps and go thru the motions, why make it easier on them? I would promptly cut off any telephone, email communications..
-
why make it easier on them to extract your money? let them purchase paper and stamps and go thru the motions, why make it easier on them? I would promptly cut off any telephone, email communications..
Plus 1 and 100% agreement. Make the bastards put everything in writing and on paper and mailed to you via good old snailmail.
-
Postal mail carries more psychological, symbolic, and legal "weight" because it takes more effort to send. Additionally, It is officially recognized as legal communication. This is why lawyers and courts use them in matters of serious communication.
The "package" of your message and words often matters to great effect. But the user has to know how to use it.
I've seen this written a few times that postal mail is preferred over email. Not sure why this is - is it because emails may sometimes get spammed or are emails still admissible when it comes to court? Thus far I've used a combination of email and letter when corresponding to Getty as they have also done the same.
-
Getty always refuses to forward proof of its claims.
Therefore, would anyone care to to explain to me in detail what you're gaining by talking with them?
I really don't see any point to all these "emails" and "letters".
S.G.
-
Great point SG. I think most people are looking for "closure." They don't want this open claim hanging over their head. But the prudent thing to do is make it very clear what you want from them, and what you are willing to do and then that's it. Further communication could simply be met with, "I was clear what I required from you and until you provide it we have nothing to discuss." End. Of. Story.
-
For some reason, there are people who feel compelled to answer the phone everytime it rings. And likewise, cannot hang up the phone without the approval of the other party.
It is true that all this talk about recording phone calls seems to be a waste of time. However, this all started with my comments to Glen Carner and his "new" phone program.
I tend to agree, just hanging up is the way to go.
I also agree with Jerry that at some point, you have to draw a line in the sand.
-
S.G.
I completely understand where you are coming from but I will tell you why I responded to my letters, even after reading the forums and knowing it would go nowhere. There have been a total of three letters sent and now I’m completely done until my requests are met. That is unless someone writes me asking me to give them some serious butt hurt like Timmy did with Matthew.
I responded to their letters to:
1) Show this was an innocent and non-willful infringement (if they owned the rights to the images)
2) Request proof they owned the image and had the right to make a claim.
3) Offer what I felt was a reasonable settlement (Providing they gave me proof)
4) Tell them I consider the matter closed and have nothing more to say until you send me the requested proof.
I did all these steps to show, should they be stupid enough to take me to court that I have been fair, reasonable and tried to settle the matter but GI has refused to negotiate and just crossed their arms, stomped their foot and cried “I want my money”
Everyone needs to decide what they want to do for themselves but for me I thought if they should try to take me to court they could say I ignored their letters and failed to respond in any way, it might look badly on me to the court. Now I can say here is my solid proof showing this was innocent infringement, here are my reasonable requests for proof, here is my settlement counter offer and GI has refused to provide anything to me except threaten escalation.
In light of the trolling cases of late where the courts have scolded the plaintiff attorneys for using the courts for business gain rather than true justice and if the image in question should be the one of the images Getty actually has register properly, innocent infringement usually brings about a 200.00 fine. I don’t think too many district courts will be happy having their time wasted over a 200.00 case. I would hope any possibility of attorney fees would be thrown out since I have made it clear I will talk and try to settle if they provided proof. I just will not pay an unreasonable amount.
Again, I completely understand the way you feel S.G. and would tend to agree but I don’t think ignoring it, at least at first is the way to go.
Getty always refuses to forward proof of its claims.
Therefore, would anyone care to to explain to me in detail what you're gaining by talking with them?
I really don't see any point to all these "emails" and "letters".
S.G.
-
I don't think anyone is advocating dead silence or outright ignoring the letters. There is a middle ground somewhere. Mine stopped at the 2nd letter and that was that. It was never escalated.
But there are some people who want to keep the dialog going with the rationale that talking about this will make riding out 3 years easier. Whatever, to me it becomes a waste of time at some point.
IN the end, everyone gets to choose what is best for them.
-
Good discussion. Whatever works for each individual is fine, of course.
I guess that if somebody's coming after me in a legal way, wants money and won't give me any proof, then all bets are off.
One doesn't have to worry about looking good in the courts eyes, as Getty's already done the worst thing that you can do when demanding a settlement.
Without proof, I wouldn't offer a cent... and why should I?
The onus isn't on me to investigate somebody else's accusations, for example.
If they can't prove anything, and they just say "pay" in each letter, then it's just going into the shredder. lol
S.G.
-
Good discussion. Whatever works for each individual is fine, of course.
I guess that if somebody's coming after me in a legal way, wants money and won't give me any proof, then all bets are off.
One doesn't have to worry about looking good in the courts eyes, as Getty's already done the worst thing that you can do when demanding a settlement.
Without proof, I wouldn't offer a cent... and why should I?
The onus isn't on me to investigate somebody else's accusations, for example.
If they can't prove anything, and they just say "pay" in each letter, then it's just going into the shredder. lol
S.G.
YEP! I however am saving them for souvenirs or perhaps to help Mulligan along with his Expose!
;D
-
This is a good discussion, and I like hearing other people views and ideas.
I agree 100% and in my response I did tell them that even if they should accept my offer ($75.00) it was contingent on them providing they sent me a "copy of the signed contract between you and the artist transferring copyright and giving you exclusive rights to the image as you have stated in your letter."
Without proof, I wouldn't offer a cent... and why should I?
-
YEP! I however am saving them for souvenirs or perhaps to help Mulligan along with his Expose!
;D
Oh my God, Peeved, tell me you're not saving paper for me because the file of evidence and correspondence and commentaries and unsent letters and nasty satires I've written for my expose is already more than an inch thick! :)
A book and movie may well be in the offing here:
"Mulligan's Guide on How to Spend Your First Three Retirement Years Messing with Copyright Trolls or How I Learned to Turn Stress and Anger into Sweet Payback and Legal Retaliation Against Digital Evil Doers Who Would Suck Money Out of Innocent Mom and Pop Webmasters!"
Starring Christopher Walken as Mulligan
With Johnny Reid "John" Edwards as McCormack
-
Actually, after I finished the last post I thought I would just go ahead and share the letter I sent. Perhaps someone who just got a letter can use it as a reference to help them if they choose to respond to GI.
Okay, I think I need your help BuddhaPi. Is there a way to insert a word doc here so that it keeps its formatting? I will post the letter once I figure out how.
-
Actually, after I finished the last post I thought I would just go ahead and share the letter I sent. Perhaps someone who just got a letter can use it as a reference to help them if they choose to respond to GI.
Okay, I think I need your help BuddhaPi. Is there a way to insert a word doc here so that it keeps its formatting? I will post the letter once I figure out how.
No way to do that, that i'm aware of, you'll probably lose the formatting..sorry i'm not to helpful today..
-
My situation is with HAN. They sent me the copyright # and a signed copy from the artist giving them rights. But.. It seems like everyone on the forum has the same copyright reg # as the photo in question on my site. Is there a way to find out if the photo is actually included in the mass copyright? I suppose I should ask them to prove to me that the photo is indeed included?
-
Activated, that's a question I've been asking too. Your image is included in some kind of cheesy bulk registration under the title "Hawaii 2002" or something like that. How are we supposed to know a specific image is included in that registration? There are also questions about whether such a sloppy method entitles them to the full monty of copyright protection.
-
Actually, after I finished the last post I thought I would just go ahead and share the letter I sent. Perhaps someone who just got a letter can use it as a reference to help them if they choose to respond to GI.
Here is the letter:
Yeah, We Do That.
XXXXX XXXX XXXXXX
Mason, Ohio 45040
Gregory A. Troy (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Owner
April 25, 2012
Getty Images
605 5th Ave South Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104
Case# XXXXXXXX
Dear D. Bieker:
I am writing in response to your letter dated April 16, 2012. I believe that we are fundamentally disagreeing on this issue. I still wish to settle this matter amicably between us. You have sent me a letter alleging copyright infringement; I have sent you my information regarding the image. Before we can continue with further discussions I need the following information from you as you are presenting me with
a Settlement Demand but no documentation supporting your claims or the amount requested.
1) I need to see verification that the image was filed with the U.S. Copyright Office
2) Verification that the copyright is either for the individual image or a group of images.
3) I need a copy of the signed contract, assignment or other documentation between Getty Images and the artist transferring copyright and giving you exclusive rights to the image as you have stated in your letter.
4) Sales history and records of this image and prices received for the image.
I have gone to your website and searched for images similar to the image in question and found you have literally hundreds available ranging in price from $10.00 to $25.00 for the size of the image. As I stated earlier I would like to settle this matter amicably, even though I still firmly believe that I do not owe Getty anything. As a good faith effort to attempt to resolve this matter I will offer Getty Images a total of $75.00, which is 3 times the amount charged for similar images. Also, in both of your letters you demand settlement within 14 days, I will not now nor will I ever be rushed into any decisions and will always take a reasonable amount of time necessary to research, consult and decide my actions before I respond to any letter.
Whether you choose to accept my offer or not I do require that you provide all of the documentation requested providing proof of copyright, contract and sales history. No monies will be paid without full and complete documentation.
You have it in your power to resolve this issue and get on with the work of protecting your client’s rights from those who are willfully and knowingly taking and using images. Again, thank you for taking the time to consider this matter and I hope you will accept my offer and then consider the issue closed as I do. I await your response.
Respectfully,
Gregory A. Troy
Owner
Yeah, We Do That.
-
The issue of bulk registration has so far always been decided in favor of our position - that is, that it does not provide protection to the individual images within the bulk registration. We are waiting for the Ninth Circuit (Appellate Court covering the West Coast, Hawaii and Alaska) to decide the issue on appeal. Just yesterday, all our papers were submitted in the California case Masterfile v. Chaga where we made the same argument. Part of the argument is that the purpose of registration is so you can locate copyrighted works to avoid infringing them. These compilation registrations don't list the names of the photos or even all of the photographers most time. The Copyright Office has been letting the digital image warehouses to just upload CDs with thousands of images on them.
-
My situation is with HAN. They sent me the copyright # and a signed copy from the artist giving them rights. But.. It seems like everyone on the forum has the same copyright reg # as the photo in question on my site. Is there a way to find out if the photo is actually included in the mass copyright? I suppose I should ask them to prove to me that the photo is indeed included?
Activated, it wouldn't hurt to ask, but they may take a page from Getty's book and respond that they will do so during discovery if they're "forced" to drag you into a court to extort money from you.
The only place I've seen a detailed description of the contents of one of VKT's collections is from an actual lawsuit filed in California. Matthew Chan placed it on Scribd some time ago. The list of the contents of the "Hawaii 2000" collection starts on page 10 of this document:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/92173102/Hawaiian-Art-Network-vs-The-Scott-Complaint
Oscar mentioned the questions that have been raised about the bulk registrations' validity or lack thereof. When the Ninth Circuit decides on the issue, and if they continue the present trend invalidating these ridiculous mass registrations, you will have been granted a legal pass on any claim for statutory damages.
Thousands of wallpaper sites seeding the images followed by hundreds of images registered under one number. Not only does VKT's trolling appear to be sloppy and lazy, it appears to be so in a grand scale.
-
After this previous post I realized I hadn't read all of the HAN complaints Matthew posted on Scribd. This other one lists the contents of another VKT lazy boy bulk registration named "Hawaii 2006":
http://www.scribd.com/doc/92173058/Hawaiian-Art-Network-vs-MND-Events-Complaint
Thanks for posting those, Matthew! Those are very helpful as we reverse engineer the perverse scheme HAN and VKT have been weaving.
Darn it, where's Glen Carner when we need him? We forgot to ask him about mass registration of massively distributed wallpaper images. Surely he has an opinion on the topic.