ExtortionLetterInfo Forums

ELI Forums => Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum => Topic started by: Matthew Chan on October 28, 2016, 12:47:33 AM

Title: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on October 28, 2016, 12:47:33 AM
I bring a warning and information about a Nicholas (Nick) Youngson (UK photographer) of NYPhotographic.com. He is represented by Higbee & Associates here in the U.S. In a short amount of time, I have run into the Nick Youngson / NYPhotographic free image/"Creative Commons" honey-trap.

As regular readers know, most lawyers working on such cases work on a commission basis (30%-35% range). They are incentivized to extract as much monies they can from any particular infringer. They also have discretion in these negotiations. They depend on people's legal ignorance and hope people will never find the ELI Forums or speak to me on an ELI Support Call.  But fortunately, people do find us and find me. 

In the case of Nick Youngson, it is plainly clear he delegates most of the process to his lawyer:

http://www.nyphotographic.com/about.html

Quote
I am spending my days locating my images that are being used without a valid license, emailing people asking them to pay the license fee and most are ignoring me.

I am now thoroughly fed up with this situation so as from now any site using my images without a valid license and being used to promote a service, I am going to pass straight to my attorney to deal with. I can't be expected to spend my days emailing people infringing my copyright only to get ignored or abused so now they can deal with my attorney.

Sites run by individuals not promoting a service will continue to receive an email asking them for my standard license fee of a few dollars.

Here's the problem I have.  On JPhotoStyle.com promoting all kinds of "free" images, it actively promotes NYPhotographic images and there is text that specifically states:

Quote
This picture related to XXXX may be used for free including for commercial purposes.

The picture below related to the word human resources is licensed by it's creator under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified.

However, some of those same images also appear on the paid site, NYPhotographic.com for $9.95!

The photographer himself allows his photos to be used under Creative Commons use and prices his own photos at $9.95 but somehow when there is an "oopsie" mistake by the user, Higbee then tries to collect $5,000-$7,000.

Of course, it is a big "bargain" if Higbee drops the settlement amount by 50% right?  Meaning settling for $2,500 to $3,500 at 30% commission nets Higbee $750-$1,050. The photographer gets the other 70% at $1,750 to $4,900.  Not a bad profit for sending a few emails to infringers right?

Remember, Youngson is charging less than $10 per photo.  So the "infringement" penalty is 250 to 350 times the sales price of the image!

We rail on Getty Images, Masterfile, LCS, etc. all the time about their settlement amounts. But the scheme being use by Youngson to lure people into "free" sites under Creative Commons use and then popping the users of those "infringers" go way beyond the tactics of our standard extortionists.  Also, the standard extortionists do not charge $10 for their images (which have settlement amounts that are lower, if one pays at all) than what Higbee and Youngson is trying to pull off.

Higbee and their ilk are likely to say that just because someone infringes, they "deserve" that exorbitant amount. I call bullshit on that.  They are the same people who, if caught speeding 5 mph over the speed limit, and were handed a $2,000 speeding ticket, would squawk how unfair and disproportionate it was.

Higbee represents a variety of photographers from what I can tell. However, this Nick Youngson and NYPhotographic.com (with the help of Higbee & Associates) is particularly egregious and people need to be on the look out for this little setup racket.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: DavidVGoliath on October 31, 2016, 08:23:05 AM
I'll agree that, at first blush, this appears to be some blatant scumfuckery; the website jphotostyle.com only has images by Nick Youngson. What sets my alarm bells ringing is that the WHOIS for jphotostyle.com is cloaked by a privacy service and was purchased via GoDaddy in Montenegro.

As working photographer, I'm absolutely f'n appalled by what appears to indeed be a blatant attempt at entrapment; I'm going to focus on just one particular image which implies this. Take a look at the picture at the following URL

http://stock-photos.nyphotographic.com/food-drink/instant-coffee02/

A javascript query of the server file above cites that the image file was last modified on March 11 of 2015.

The very first published use of this photograph that I can find is at http://3stylelife.com/hello-world, and a query of the server returns that the relevant image was last modified on 12 December of 2014, though the article that uses it cites a date of publication of September 9 of 2013.

Youngson's earliest copyright registered certificate is a group registration titled still-images-13-08-24 under certificate VAu-1-149-100, with an effective date of registration being August 26, 2013; this appears to be the only of Youngson's certificates that predates the published use of the coffee bean picture as on 3lifestyle.com

Now I wanted to see if there were any published uses of this specific photograph that predated either the published use on 3stylelife.com and/or the registration certificate... and I got one hit: a Russian language website called finska.ru, on a page with URL http://finska.ru/category_20.html; Google had indexed the page back on 12 October of 2010 and reported the image on that site.

Now, this isn't a smoking gun as the indexing pointed to the following file

http://finska.ru/data/images/stati/luchshiy-rastvorimyy-kofe/1.png

The reported date/time this image was last modified was on 9 September of 2015.

Regardless, one of the other things that has my alarm bells ringing is that all images on the website 3lifestyle.com are only from NYPhotographic; I can't wrap my head around as to why this would be, but one might suppose that Mr. Youngson created the website 3lifestyle.com so that his own business - nyphotographic.com - would show backlinks and start to rise up search engine rankings.

Now my alarm bells ring extra-loud for two more reasons: there's a robots.txt file on 3stylelife.com that doesn't allow archival indexing, and the WHOIS data for the site is obfuscated via DomainsByProxy.

Lastly, Mr. Youngson appears to have a very narrow oeuvre of images that also appear to be of very low quality (from a sharpness, lighting & compositional sense). It just strikes me as odd that someone would go to the trouble of registering a body of work with the Copyright Office and then offering it up for both Creative Commons uses and also paid licensing.

It's odder still when you look at the following archived snapshot of jphotostyle.com

http://web.archive.org/web/20140104041339/http://jphotostyle.com

I believe in strong copyrights, and I absolutely believe in the right of creators to seek fair compensation for unlicensed uses of their work - and that sometimes litigation is the only route to that end... but I equally believe that the laws, as written, should not be abused, and anyone who appears to be doing so absolutely should be called out for it.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on November 01, 2016, 02:38:14 PM
I can never say for sure I know EVERYTHING about a situation that gets my attention. But I generally have a good smell for bullshit or sleaze.

And there is something just damn peculiar with the way this Nick Youngson & the NYPhotographic.com website operates.

To be fair, the 3stylelife doesn't appear to be a legit website. I also don't pay attention to any .ru website. They are bad news. I think it is too much a stretch to attribute Nick to these websites. There are plenty of pirates out there.

I've had .ru websites pirate my work but I generally disregard it because anyone worth a damn wouldn't visit .ru websites. They are generally untrustworthy on par with Nigerian web scams.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on November 21, 2016, 03:51:14 PM
I have just received one of these letters from the usage of a image by this photographer.

I obtained the image through the creativecommons.org search which led me to a site (different from the ones listed in this thread) which directly links to the photographers site.  (it appears to be possibly owned by the photographer as the banners on it and all images / links point to his site)

On the first website, (where the image was obtained from) displayed below the image is : " This image _________  may be used for free even for commercial purposes.

The image _________ below is licensed by it's creator under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified. "

Based upon this understanding I used the image.

Had I've known that purchasing a license was required I would have either (a) looked elsewhere or (b) paid for a license like I have done in the past.

Either way I have collected enough data to get this thing thrown out of court should it end up in litigation.

Pathetic.

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Albert on November 22, 2016, 03:36:25 PM
Received the same letter asking for $2K.

Research so far makes this seem like a scam.  Something is just not right here! The problem is to uncover the scam is going to take time and money nobody whats to waste on these people.

I have my theory on how this scam works which I will keep to myself for now.

Any help on how to tackle this extortion would be appreciated. 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Libertas on November 22, 2016, 06:26:04 PM
Received the same letter asking for $2K.

Research so far makes this seem like a scam.  Something is just not right here! The problem is to uncover the scam is going to take time and money nobody whats to waste on these people.

I have my theory on how this scam works which I will keep to myself for now.

Any help on how to tackle this extortion would be appreciated. 

I would definitely say these are a racket, especially in cases like Mr. Youngson's. It has been well documented that he submits his photos to Free Wallpaper websites, basically a honeypot to facilitate the proliferation of his images, in some cases showing up under creative commons search engines. 

In your case, I would research your photo as best you can and determine where you got it (if you haven't already).  Definitely read up on the Aloha Plastic Surgery Counter-Claim. Not that it may be a strategy in your case, but good reading none the less and showed how one individual was able to turn this business model on its head. Now that this extortion has become a business in it's own right, I like to think of ways to make this more expensive and time consuming for the extortionists. However, that might not always be the best choice, although it has worked in other cases. Definitely do your homework.

All these extortions are the same. They hope to scare you enough to settle and in most cases, their initial offer is around twice of what they expect to receive. You can settle it, ignore it, or fight it. The option you choose is the one you think will have the best outcome. The common Getty letters have been ignored by a lot of recipients and due to the large scope of their operation, the costs of suing people for de minimis copyright infringement, and other factors usually nets a good a outcome in those cases. However, in your case, it may be different and that is why researching these forums, pacer, and the internet might be a good way to determine a course of action.

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on November 23, 2016, 01:04:23 AM
@albert

read this thread: http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/hawaiian-letters-lawsuits-forum/aloha-plastic-surgery-submits-counter-claim/

and here: http://copyright-trolls.com/2.0/in-the-event-that-adlife-marketing-files-suits-against-you/

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: stinger on November 23, 2016, 09:41:25 AM
Also, be sure to take copies of the web pages that led you to believe the images were free (just in case this ever reaches a courtroom, I doubt that it will).  The really good extortionists have a way of making things disappear to try and strengthen their claim.

Someone who can prove this stands to do quite well in the courtroom, methinks.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: DavidVGoliath on November 23, 2016, 02:00:21 PM
Someone who can prove this stands to do quite well in the courtroom, methinks.

The trick to doing that lies in the trap: most of the websites that offer the work of Youngson do so via a Creative Commons CC BY-SA 3.0 license, which mandates the following

You are free to:

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format

Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

AttributionYou must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

I've italicized the text regarding attribution because it seems that Youngson is relying on non-attributed uses to claim breach of license and, by extension, infringement of copyright.

This is where it gets fuzzy: I do not know if there are any case precedents whereby any entity has sued for a breach of 17 USC 106(a) alone.... because the photographs as offered on jphotostyle.com, thebluediamondgallery.com, and picserver.org, all state variations of the following text

"The images on this web site have been created by photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com and are offered for free use, even commercial use, under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license"

I think most people read as far as the 'free to use' part and pay zero attention to the minutiae of  the CC license requirements.

Unless someone can point to a case precedent where a violation of 106(a) was the sole basis for an infringement claim (and certainly 501(a) - as written - seems to allow claims to be made on that basis), then it's going to take someone actually fighting this at court to establish the scale of damages for such an act.

That person will also need to subpoena the actual owner-of-record information for the websites jphotostyle.com, thebluediamondgallery.com, and picserver.org, because my gut tells me that Mr. Youngson is the owner of all these sites and (in a very roundabout manner that appears to be on the razor's edge of legality) is relying on people's negligence of the CC licenses on these sites to snare them into an infringement claim.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on December 13, 2016, 08:02:29 PM
First of all, thanks to Matthew Chan and everyone else for bringing to light the doings of Nick Youngson and Higbee Associates. I'm glad I found this forum.
I have received a fairly threatening letter from Mathew Higbee about one image which was on my tiny startup's business website, and is currently on Nick Youngson's nyphotographic site for $9.95. It is a generic image (we already replaced it with another very similar and free, CC0 image from pixabay.com). Higbee is asking for $5k in a letter that even stretches the clauses of 17USC504 to their limit (in my legal-amateur understanding).
We had absolutely no intention of infringing any copyright and we obtained this file from a CC0 site in Nov 2015, as our download timestamp shows (unfortunately it seems we lost records as to which site is the source for this specific image. All other images on our site are from pixabay.com, pexels.com and a commons search and we have records for all others as being CC0).  It looks like we must have downloaded one of Mr Youngson's last CC0 images during/before the period he started his "crusade". http://www.nyphotographic.com/about.html.
We have of course immediately removed the image from our website within hours of receiving the letter.
In addition to any response advice folks on this forum may have, we have 4 questions:
1. Should we respond ourselves and see what happens, or just bite the bullet and get a lawyer to write a letter? (Not sure if the Letter Writing program on this site applies to non-Getty cases?)
e.g. we could respond stating: (a) no intent to infringe (b) we downloaded from a CC0 site (c) we have removed the image immediately (d) (still debating whether to include something like this - thoughts?) offer to settle for license fee of $9.95 + 200% penalty or approx $30 which seems fair.
If they continue to send letters, we would respond asking for all kinds of information as suggested in some of the other forum threads.
2. It looks like even if we can't prove we downloaded from a CC0 site (we are still trying to find records), the infringement is for not having attribution. We have not modified the image. Does this help us in any way?
3. The copyright they stated is for a set of image(s). I have written to the copyright office to get info on which images are included. Is there anything else to do to figure out if he explicitly has copyright on this image?
3. Nick Youngson and his company seem to be registered in the UK, not the US. Does this affect anything?
Thanks!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: DavidVGoliath on December 15, 2016, 08:24:33 AM
I'll respond to each point in turn, with the caveat that I am a photographer and have taken legal action in the US courts to defend my own images.

1. Should we respond ourselves and see what happens, or just bite the bullet and get a lawyer to write a letter? (Not sure if the Letter Writing program on this site applies to non-Getty cases?)
e.g. we could respond stating: (a) no intent to infringe (b) we downloaded from a CC0 site (c) we have removed the image immediately (d) (still debating whether to include something like this - thoughts?) offer to settle for license fee of $9.95 + 200% penalty or approx $30 which seems fair.
If they continue to send letters, we would respond asking for all kinds of information as suggested in some of the other forum threads.

As much as I am a working photographer who earns my full income from image licensing and assignments, it behooves me to say that Mr. Youngson's methods of enforcing his rights make it seem that he is operating a honeytrap, insofar that he appears to be reliant on users lack of knowledge of the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license terms to claim infringement. It certainly seems to be a very scummy play that borders on a scam. That's my opinion, and it would certainly colour my approach as far as responding to a claim goes.

2. It looks like even if we can't prove we downloaded from a CC0 site (we are still trying to find records), the infringement is for not having attribution. We have not modified the image. Does this help us in any way?

No: a copyright = the right permit another entity to make/use a copy of your work. An unmodified copy is still a copy and, without permission to make that copy and use it, there's a breach of rights.

With that said, the grey area lies in Youngson's ability to bring a claim solely on lack of attribution. I personally have never heard of such a claim being brought.  Certainly, Youngson's images are being offered without charge via Creative Common's licensing, and I do not know of any United States case law precedents where claims have been brought for what is tantamount to a breach of licensing terms, even though 17 USC 106(a) does have a clause citing lack of attribution as being an infringement of rights.

3. The copyright they stated is for a set of image(s). I have written to the copyright office to get info on which images are included. Is there anything else to do to figure out if he explicitly has copyright on this image?

Not currently, and this is a bugbear for artists as much as those facing infringement claims. I'd welcome the Copyright Office having a searchable database of actual images contained within a deposit. It would certainly speed things up as regards verifying claims for all parties. I'm sure you're already aware of the current process as described at https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ06.pdf

4. Nick Youngson and his company seem to be registered in the UK, not the US. Does this affect anything?
Thanks!

Nope. Treaties such as WIPO and the preceding Berne Convention allow citizens of signatory nations/states to protect their copyrights in other signatory territories. As both the UK and USA are treaty nations, Youngson is free to file a suit in the US if he wants to.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: ih8trolls on December 16, 2016, 03:16:01 PM
Has anyone actually seen any suits filed by Mr. Youngson? I could not find any cases filed by Nick Youngson, NY Photographic and RM Media on any federal court.

I'm in the middle of a battle with Higbee and Youngson right now. Of course they state in writing they that have litigated numerous cases for Mr. Youngson.  Yeah right...
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: BGgruff on December 16, 2016, 04:23:50 PM
Hi everyone

Much like ih8trolls, someco, albert, and clist, an acquaintance of mine is also in the middle of a copyright issue with higbee and associates over the use of a photograph. To answer your question ih8trolls, we did do some searching and could not locate any evidence that Mr. Youngson has gone to court yet over these cases.

There are several instances of higbee going to court for other clients over copyrighted images, but no case I found had ever made it to a judges ruling. Each time the case seemed to be settled between the parties and the cases were dismissed "with prejudice" against the infringing party. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know what that means.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 18, 2016, 08:55:25 AM
Good morning,

i also received a letter on Dec 17, 2016 from this lawfirm representing N. Youngson.
They are called LIEBOWITZ LAW FIRM from New York.

In regards to the image used, this is the image on PICSERVER.ORG:
http://www.picserver.org/m/marketing.html

I have removed the image from my website as stated by Matthew Chan here on this forum.

It also showed up as "labeled for Reuse" on Google where it sent me to picserver.org
I agree people stop reading after "Free to reuse" is mentioned on the website(s).

On Picserver, apparently you need to read the small print.
Here is the small print for the licenses:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

The specific image can be bought for $9.95
http://stock-photos.nyphotographic.com/highway-signs/marketing/

And apparently Nick Youngson is located in the UK, and the Licensee Contact Name has an email address that is not operational. Just try to go to www.jones.com -> not working
http://stock-photos.nyphotographic.com/licence.html

And reading this thread, this is nto the first time they are trying to "scam" people into money.
I am a hard working one man business owner, and i do not have this kind of money to float.

just wondering what you guys have done to move forward?


Thanks,
Kev

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 18, 2016, 08:58:26 AM
I bring a warning and information about a Nicholas (Nick) Youngson (UK photographer) of NYPhotographic.com. He is represented by Higbee & Associates here in the U.S. In a short amount of time, I have run into the Nick Youngson / NYPhotographic free image/"Creative Commons" honey-trap.

I received the same warning letter yesterday Dec 17, but it was coming from Liebowitz Law Firm in New York.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 18, 2016, 09:00:11 AM
I'll agree that, at first blush, this appears to be some blatant scumfuckery; the website jphotostyle.com only has images by Nick Youngson. What sets my alarm bells ringing is that the WHOIS for jphotostyle.com is cloaked by a privacy service and was purchased via GoDaddy in Montenegro.

As working photographer, I'm absolutely f'n appalled by what appears to indeed be a blatant attempt at entrapment; I'm going to focus on just one particular image which implies this. Take a look at the picture at the following URL

http://stock-photos.nyphotographic.com/food-drink/instant-coffee02/

A javascript query of the server file above cites that the image file was last modified on March 11 of 2015.

The very first published use of this photograph that I can find is at http://3stylelife.com/hello-world, and a query of the server returns that the relevant image was last modified on 12 December of 2014, though the article that uses it cites a date of publication of September 9 of 2013.

Youngson's earliest copyright registered certificate is a group registration titled still-images-13-08-24 under certificate VAu-1-149-100, with an effective date of registration being August 26, 2013; this appears to be the only of Youngson's certificates that predates the published use of the coffee bean picture as on 3lifestyle.com

Now I wanted to see if there were any published uses of this specific photograph that predated either the published use on 3stylelife.com and/or the registration certificate... and I got one hit: a Russian language website called finska.ru, on a page with URL http://finska.ru/category_20.html; Google had indexed the page back on 12 October of 2010 and reported the image on that site.

Now, this isn't a smoking gun as the indexing pointed to the following file

http://finska.ru/data/images/stati/luchshiy-rastvorimyy-kofe/1.png

The reported date/time this image was last modified was on 9 September of 2015.

Regardless, one of the other things that has my alarm bells ringing is that all images on the website 3lifestyle.com are only from NYPhotographic; I can't wrap my head around as to why this would be, but one might suppose that Mr. Youngson created the website 3lifestyle.com so that his own business - nyphotographic.com - would show backlinks and start to rise up search engine rankings.

Now my alarm bells ring extra-loud for two more reasons: there's a robots.txt file on 3stylelife.com that doesn't allow archival indexing, and the WHOIS data for the site is obfuscated via DomainsByProxy.

Lastly, Mr. Youngson appears to have a very narrow oeuvre of images that also appear to be of very low quality (from a sharpness, lighting & compositional sense). It just strikes me as odd that someone would go to the trouble of registering a body of work with the Copyright Office and then offering it up for both Creative Commons uses and also paid licensing.

It's odder still when you look at the following archived snapshot of jphotostyle.com

http://web.archive.org/web/20140104041339/http://jphotostyle.com

I believe in strong copyrights, and I absolutely believe in the right of creators to seek fair compensation for unlicensed uses of their work - and that sometimes litigation is the only route to that end... but I equally believe that the laws, as written, should not be abused, and anyone who appears to be doing so absolutely should be called out for it.

Good constructive feedback there, highly appreciated.
Where can we check to see if the image is indeed fully copyrighted?
I mean, not just anybody can upload a photograph and claim copyright?
Isn't there a process like with a Trademark?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 18, 2016, 09:01:18 AM
I have just received one of these letters from the usage of a image by this photographer.  :(

I am wondering what plan of action should I take?

I obtained the image through the creativecommons.org search which led me to a site (different from the ones listed in this thread) which directly links to the photographers site.  (it appears to be possibly owned by the photographer as the banners on it and all images / links point to his site)

On the first website, (where the image was obtained from) displayed below the image is : " This image _________  may be used for free even for commercial purposes.

The image _________ below is licensed by it's creator under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified. "

Based upon this understanding I used the image.

Had I've known that purchasing a license was required I would have either (a) looked elsewhere or (b) paid for a license like I have done in the past.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks

Same here, picserver.org tries to lure people in and then you get scammed or get a letter like this.
How can we find out who is operating picserver.org?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 18, 2016, 09:04:09 AM
@albert

read this thread: http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/hawaiian-letters-lawsuits-forum/aloha-plastic-surgery-submits-counter-claim/

and here: http://copyright-trolls.com/2.0/in-the-event-that-adlife-marketing-files-suits-against-you/

It literally turns my stomach people would do this to extort hard working business owners and try to scam them.
I think we should all get together and file a case against these actions from N Youngson.
i mean, one week before Christmas and they are still trying to financially ruin small business owners.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: pctechguy1 on December 18, 2016, 10:06:04 AM
I just received a letter from Higbee & Associates representing Nick Youngson. They are demanding I pay $5000.00 in 10 days or they will sue. This is for one image on a test website for 60 days. I got the image from picserver and it said the image was free to use even commercially. So the image is free to use as is but there is a link to the full size image in which you can buy it for $9.95. How can an image go from free to $5000.00?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on December 18, 2016, 01:45:01 PM
Interesting how this is unfolding...

Part of me can't help but wonder if the firm(s) representing this individual are even aware that their client is clearly seeding the web.


Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on December 18, 2016, 02:12:14 PM
Additionally, if you are reading this (and have received a letter) and are feeling overwhelmed :


The information contained in some of the threads on this site is golden.

You'll soon find that there are quite a few threads from people just like you that offer helpful suggestions and strategies.

 8)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kingkendall on December 18, 2016, 05:52:49 PM
kvanvreckem

I can only speak for myself and the research I've done.  I don't like to get rolled and I don't respond will to intimidation.  This is their whole tactic to get your scared.  Like others have said don't panic, get educated the best you can.  As far as contacting the lawyer I'm of the opinion if you contact them then your telling them your spooked.  That's not a position of strength in my opinion.  I'm not going to talk to them and say something wrong they can use against me.  Others may disagree and I welcome their views.  As far as getting a lawyer to contact them, here's the problem with that.  That lawyer is gonna charge you money to deal with it.  It comes down to your stomach.  But, the more you educate yourself the more strength you gain.  Overall, it sucks.  But don't let it overtake your life.     
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 19, 2016, 04:20:56 PM
No, you are assuming they will sue. They may or may not sue. I have not seen any lawsuits filed by Nick Youngson or Higbee.  $5,000 is an arbitrary number on all of the recent Higbee letters I have seen.

But they will continue to pursue the matter by antagonizing you for the next 2-3 years.  You need to get educated on how extortion letters "work" so you are better prepared to deal with it. Otherwise, you will become a victim of ignorance. It gets expensive staying ignorant.

I just received a letter from Higbee & Associates representing Nick Youngson. They are demanding I pay $5000.00 in 10 days or they will sue. This is for one image on a test website for 60 days. I got the image from picserver and it said the image was free to use even commercially. So the image is free to use as is but there is a link to the full size image in which you can buy it for $9.95. How can an image go from free to $5000.00?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 19, 2016, 04:24:57 PM
Nope, I have not seen any lawsuits by Nick Youngson yet. You are not alone, fortunately. I've consulted with a number of victims. As of right now, just a bunch of $5,000 letters over $10 images because of the Creative Commons mess.

Has anyone actually seen any suits filed by Mr. Youngson? I could not find any cases filed by Nick Youngson, NY Photographic and RM Media on any federal court.

I'm in the middle of a battle with Higbee and Youngson right now. Of course they state in writing they that have litigated numerous cases for Mr. Youngson.  Yeah right...
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 19, 2016, 04:28:09 PM
I'd like to see a copy of the Liebowtiz letter if you'd like to email it to me at matt30060 / gmail. This appears to be a new development.  All the other letters I have seen is from Higbee.

I received the same warning letter yesterday Dec 17, but it was coming from Liebowitz Law Firm in New York.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: chinagirl on December 20, 2016, 12:32:54 PM
The small business that I work for has also received one of these letters, from Higbee and Associates. I posted the image after getting it from PicServer, failing to notice the "must attribute" part. Our lawyers have contacted Higbee and Associates and the minimum settlement they are willing to accept is $750. My boss is wanting to settle just to be done with it, as her lawyers are charging $350 an hour to deal with this. We offered to buy the image, (after immediately removing it).



Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on December 20, 2016, 01:09:09 PM
@chinagirl

Just out of curiosity how much was the amount on the initial demand letter?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: chinagirl on December 21, 2016, 11:25:46 AM
$5,000 payment, same as the other letters.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: pctechguy1 on December 21, 2016, 10:13:48 PM
Count me in.
I too am being harassed by Higbee. I received a notice from them in the mail on Saturday, 12/17/2016. The very next day they sent a email requesting payment of $5000.00. I just received another email today (Wednesday) trying to collect again. I have a copy of the creative commons license from pixserver.org. I sent a letter to the Defense Letter Program at 'digitalimagelitigation@gmail.com' but I have not heard back from them yet.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 22, 2016, 10:54:52 AM
CList gets it.  Very good advice which we tell others.

Additionally, if you are reading this (and have received a letter) and are feeling overwhelmed :

  • Understand that you are not alone in this
  • Step back to gain perspective
  • Then take some time to read through the forums and use the search

The information contained in some of the threads on this site is golden.

You'll soon find that there are quite a few threads from people just like you that offer helpful suggestions and strategies.

 8)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 22, 2016, 10:59:47 AM
Generally speaking, when people choose to settle, it is done quietly.  And most settlement agreements call for the parties to NOT discuss it. Most people who settle, tend to fall off the grid.  Although, I do keep my ear to the ground and pickup some nuggets occasionally. I can tell you that anyone that settle close to the stated amount are generally very uninformed.

The small business that I work for has also received one of these letters, from Higbee and Associates. I posted the image after getting it from PicServer, failing to notice the "must attribute" part. Our lawyers have contacted Higbee and Associates and the minimum settlement they are willing to accept is $750. My boss is wanting to settle just to be done with it, as her lawyers are charging $350 an hour to deal with this. We offered to buy the image, (after immediately removing it).

Here are my questions: has anyone else dealing with this photographer and firm reached a settlement? If so, do you mind sharing what it is?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: pctechguy1 on December 25, 2016, 02:48:59 PM
Higbee just sent me a collection message via email on Christmas day. Can you believe it? Classless intimidation.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on December 25, 2016, 03:52:35 PM
Higbee just sent me a collection message via email on Christmas day. Can you believe it? Classless intimidation.

Its probably an automated email.

Don't let it get to you.

Enjoy your Holiday.

 8)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kingkendall on December 25, 2016, 07:09:45 PM
Higbee just sent me a collection message via email on Christmas day. Can you believe it? Classless intimidation.

Its probably an automated email.

Don't let it get to you.

Enjoy your Holiday.

 8)

I agree it's probably an auto mail.  But, that doesn't take away on how it reflects on the name behind it.  Not much of a law practice I think if it's reduced to sending demand emails on Christmas Day.  Keep everything he sends you in a file and get all your ducks in a row in order not to become low hanging fruit.   
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 26, 2016, 10:12:38 AM
Good morning, and Merry Christmas.

I have been offline for about a week now, my family from Belgium was in town so we went to Walt Disney Orlando with our 11 month old. Good experience and quality family time!

That being said, back to the our issue at hand:
- I received an email from Scott Moses, Scott Moses <outreachmob@gmail.com>, who emailed the following:
Quote
Dear Sir/Madam,

A photo was posted onto your website without appropriate attribution. The original photo, to which we own the license, can be found at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mkhmarketing/8541370656/

The unauthorized and infringing instance of the image can be found at: http://www.delraycomputers.com/webdesign-boca-raton/

Under the Creative Commons license, you are free to use the image but you must give appropriate credit. Please attribute the image to StartBloggingOnline.com and link to: http://startbloggingonline.com

Thank you.

Respectfully,
Scott Moses

=> This is the right way to do it, without any intimidation or scare tactics. And he clearly states the image(s) used under the Creative Commons license just needs an attribution to the author. I do not see the point of people filing a law suit for a picture used on a blog, unless it is a nationwide TV campaign of some sort. This email can also be used as leverage and/or leverage if this should escalate any further.

=> I also mentioned "image courtesy of .. " in my footer of my website.

PS: please note the Scott Moses email concerned a different image than the one Liebowitz has sent me.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 26, 2016, 10:15:03 AM
I'd like to see a copy of the Liebowtiz letter if you'd like to email it to me at matt30060 / gmail. This appears to be a new development.  All the other letters I have seen is from Higbee.

I received the same warning letter yesterday Dec 17, but it was coming from Liebowitz Law Firm in New York.

I will do this asap, i just got back from a family vacation. I already replied with some email i received from somebody, HOWEVER this concerned a different image than the Liebowitz letter. That image has already been deleted on my website.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 26, 2016, 10:16:07 AM
The small business that I work for has also received one of these letters, from Higbee and Associates. I posted the image after getting it from PicServer, failing to notice the "must attribute" part. Our lawyers have contacted Higbee and Associates and the minimum settlement they are willing to accept is $750. My boss is wanting to settle just to be done with it, as her lawyers are charging $350 an hour to deal with this. We offered to buy the image, (after immediately removing it).

Here are my questions: has anyone else dealing with this photographer and firm reached a settlement? If so, do you mind sharing what it is?

UPDATE: we have decided to ignore this, and if we continue to be harassed, will threaten a counter lawsuit for entrapment. If anyone else being threatened by this photographer would like to add their name to our list we would appreciate your information. Please send an email to julie at josiahmorgan dot com

I can forward you my information and case information. I have also replied to this thread with some info.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 26, 2016, 10:17:24 AM
Count me in.
I too am being harassed by Higbee. I received a notice from them in the mail on Saturday, 12/17/2016. The very next day they sent a email requesting payment of $5000.00. I just received another email today (Wednesday) trying to collect again. I have a copy of the creative commons license from pixserver.org. I sent a letter to the Defense Letter Program at 'digitalimagelitigation@gmail.com' but I have not heard back from them yet.

Interesting, i did not know there was an agency that was dealing with this stuff!

PS: my letter was from Liebowitz, but i have not yet received an email, just a letter with a draft "law suit" paperwork.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: pctechguy1 on December 26, 2016, 04:33:15 PM
Just found this in a posting at http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/intelprop/magazine/LANDSLIDEMay2010_McKinney.authcheckdam.pdf
That's my attribute by the way.

Somehow, Higbee forgot to include the second paragraph (below) in the demand letter he sent me.

"The range for statutory damages set forth in § 504(c) of the
Copyright Act is $750 to $30,000 per work infringed.32 If
the copyright owner can prove that the infringement was
“willful,” the court may increase the award to $150,000.

Alternatively, if the defendant proves that he was not aware
and had no reason to believe that his actions constituted
infringement, the court, in its discretion, may reduce the
statutory award to $200 per work infringed."
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on December 28, 2016, 03:42:46 PM
I'd like to see a copy of the Liebowtiz letter if you'd like to email it to me at matt30060 / gmail. This appears to be a new development.  All the other letters I have seen is from Higbee.

I received the same warning letter yesterday Dec 17, but it was coming from Liebowitz Law Firm in New York.

Matthew, have you received my email?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on December 28, 2016, 06:45:03 PM
Yes, I received the submission. I will look into this further after the holidays.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Defender on December 29, 2016, 11:16:59 AM
I'm aware of yet another that has been the victim of the Nick Youngson honeytrap and has now received the $5K demand letter from Higbee.  What is the recommended course of action? 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on January 05, 2017, 03:07:38 PM
Yes, I received the submission. I will look into this further after the holidays.

thanks
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on January 05, 2017, 03:08:32 PM
I'm aware of yet another that has been the victim of the Nick Youngson honeytrap and has now received the $5K demand letter from Higbee.  What is the recommended course of action?

Good afternoon,

see my previous posts, i received a letter, educated myself, and if and when they reach out to me, i will take further action.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Defender on January 14, 2017, 12:56:49 PM
Thanks.  No action taken yet, just a bunch of harassing telephone calls from Higbee office, and most recently a call from a woman claiming to be an attorney indicating she will be filing suit in federal court.  Do I call their bluff and do nothing, or do I file off a letter in response stating image was removed and try to argue they have no claim because the image was on a site listed "free for commercial use" etc etc.  This has been going on for a few months now and they are turning up the pressure.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on January 14, 2017, 02:32:02 PM
This mention of trolls making phone calls I haven't heard in a long while. Apparently, Higbee is new to this.

This is a small list what I would consider doing regarding unwanted phone calls:

1. Screen calls.
2. Let calls go to voicemail. If they got anything to say, let them say it there. If not, then good.
3. Block the number.
4. Install a voice recording app and record the conversation.  If you are in a 1-state consent state, you can record them without notice. If you are in a 2-state consent state, you interrupt them and say. "Before you say anything, I am letting you know I am recording this call." And honestly, for me personally (not advice to anyone), if I have an uninvited, unsolicited, or suspicious call, I will record them anyway as I think prosecutor offices have better things to do than go after citizens who are simply trying to protect and defend themselves.
5. Instruct them in writing that their calls unwelcome and they should not call the number anymore.

The easiest thing to do is screen all unknown calls and let it go to voicemail. The least amount of drama.  I highly recommend Google Voice. Lots of great features.

Thanks.  No action taken yet, just a bunch of harassing telephone calls from Higbee office, and most recently a call from a woman claiming to be an attorney indicating she will be filing suit in federal court.  Do I call their bluff and do nothing, or do I file off a letter in response stating image was removed and try to argue they have no claim because the image was on a site listed "free for commercial use" etc etc.  This has been going on for a few months now and they are turning up the pressure.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Defender on January 17, 2017, 10:26:13 AM
Thanks Matthew.  Great advice and tips on the unsolicited phone calls.

I'm really wondering if you think we should respond in writing (email or letter) telling them to get lost and advising that image was removed and that the image was initially posted on a site listed "free for commercial use".  Is it worth doing that or do we just sit back and wait? 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Greg Troy (KeepFighting) on January 17, 2017, 05:06:08 PM
I would not mention anything about the free site, it doesn't matter where you got the image.  The only way talking about that might help you is if you went to court to show it was an innocent infringement and not a willful one.  Just my opinion.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Greg Troy (KeepFighting) on January 18, 2017, 08:20:16 AM
I think the lesson to learn from this is that unless you purchase the rights to an image, take the picture yourself or it is a public domain image someone owns the rights to it. 

I would STRONGLY  suggest that if you have ANY other images on your site(s) that do not meet the above qualifications you remove them immediately, also from your server and the wayback machine.  You can purchase good quality images for just a few bucks from reputable image companies like POND5.com.   

What you do will depend on your ability to deal with this.  Yes, you will get calls (which Matthew has already told you how to handle) and letters, all the information you need is here in articles and the knowledge base of it's members but it all comes down to you and how well you can handle it.  Some go silent, some fight and some pay just to make it go away.  You have to decide what is best for you.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on January 18, 2017, 02:47:43 PM
Education is a process. You have just begun the process. Most of the "hard" facts are out here but if you don't settle, there is uncertainty.  Hence, all the angst and stress.

There is a psychological component to how all this works. It has been discussed frequently.

Time is on your side.  However, if you need someone to help you sort things out and apply it specifically to your issues and situation, I do offer the ELI Support Call program:
http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/eli-phone-support-call-with-matthew-chan/

Way better and informative than hiring some lawyer to try to translate all this for you.

We don't know what to do. Reading this forum is comforting, knowing I'm not alone... But it does make it seem like our choices are haggle and pay this person some obscene amount of money, or put up with a barrage of phone calls for years and pray they don't sue at some point.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on February 02, 2017, 06:47:45 PM
I've posted previously about being one of the targets, looks like there's a lot of us.
Some useful info I found, FYI for all -
- if you want to check whether the image is actually included in the copyright they sent you, you can do so by "inspecting the copyright deposit". It costs $100. The copyright office said "Processing your request will begin once the U.S. Copyright Office receives the payment of applicable fees. To expedite receipt of payment, we recommend calling Records Research and Certification at 202-707-6787 to submit payment by credit card.  The office is open Monday through Friday (except holidays), from 8:30am - 5:00pm EST. A staff member will assist you with payment." Email copycerts@loc.gov
- some informal legal advice I got was to keep any response minimal - "removed image" or some such. There is personal liability possible even if this was done through a corporation etc i.e. it seems copyright infringement, if proven, can "pierce the corporate veil" for personal liability for statutory damages or other settlement. I don't know all the legal details here by a long shot, so this is not legal advice, but just be careful what you share with them.

Thanks to folks who are sharing their approach - ignore it, negotiate (seems like they go as low as $750), threaten to counter-sue for entrapment. I let them know the image was removed etc - they continue to harass via email and letter. I am getting legal advice before I decide whether to ignore, settle, or what. But my heart rate is more normalized now that I have the support of this forum. Needless to say this is an unneeded and unwelcome waste of time and $ :-s
Thanks.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kvanvreckem on February 03, 2017, 07:50:20 AM
I've posted previously about being one of the targets, looks like there's a lot of us.
Some useful info I found, FYI for all -
- if you want to check whether the image is actually included in the copyright they sent you, you can do so by "inspecting the copyright deposit". It costs $100. The copyright office said "Processing your request will begin once the U.S. Copyright Office receives the payment of applicable fees. To expedite receipt of payment, we recommend calling Records Research and Certification at 202-707-6787 to submit payment by credit card.  The office is open Monday through Friday (except holidays), from 8:30am - 5:00pm EST. A staff member will assist you with payment." Email copycerts@loc.gov
- some informal (and too late :-s) legal advice I got was to keep any response minimal - "removed image" or some such. There is personal liability possible even if this was done through a corporation etc i.e. it seems copyright infringement, if proven, can "pierce the corporate veil" for personal liability for statutory damages or other settlement. I don't know all the legal details here by a long shot, so this is not legal advice, but just be careful what you share with them.

Thanks to folks who are sharing their approach - ignore it, negotiate (seems like they go as low as $750), threaten to counter-sue for entrapment. I let them know the image was removed etc - they continue to harass via email and letter. I am getting legal advice before I decide whether to ignore, settle, or what. But my heart rate is more normalized now that I have the support of this forum. Needless to say this is an unneeded and unwelcome waste of time and $ :-s
Thanks.

I can confirm this forum has helped me a lot for my own piece of mind.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on February 03, 2017, 09:53:17 AM
why pay 100.00? when you can search the copyright database for free and it is upon them to prove their case.. if you are going to respond demand they send you documentation of registration. Obviously if they have it, they will send it, why wouldn't they?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on February 03, 2017, 01:38:06 PM
@BuddhaPi - yes, definitely. If I respond again, it will be with a bunch of demands including the detailed registration info. However as far as I can find out, the only way to search the copyright database for free is by going in person to the Washington DC location - which I can't do. From what the copyright office told me via email, the only other way to do it is $100 payment so they can pull the deposited images. If you know other ways, please do share!
Thanks!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on February 03, 2017, 03:48:29 PM
Searching the online Copyright Office records is free and easy. You can search through copyright files by visiting the Copyright Office at www.copyright.gov/records. All copyright information is located in the Public Catalog (click “Search Public Catalog”) which contains information about works registered since January 1978. Included are published and unpublished text works, maps, motion pictures, music, sound recordings, works of the performing and visual arts, graphic artworks, and games. Also included are renewals of previous registrations.

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on February 15, 2017, 12:28:46 PM
Hi @buddhapi, thanks. Yes, you can use this to check that a copyright exists, that it is under Nick Youngson's name, and that it is for images. However you cannot see what specific content is included in that copyright. Multiple images may be part of the same copyright and you cannot see the actual images contained in it. Now perhaps we can assume that Higbee has a smart enough operation that he will ensure the image copyright information is correct - but IMHO (and attorneys I have consulted) it is always prudent to check whether the image in question for you is actually copyrighted. In order to get the actual images under a specific copyright registration, the copyright office gave me the procedure I listed above. Please let me know if you have found a better way. Thanks.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on February 15, 2017, 12:52:14 PM
Hi @buddhapi, thanks. Yes, you can use this to check that a copyright exists, that it is under Nick Youngson's name, and that it is for images. However you cannot see what specific content is included in that copyright. Multiple images may be part of the same copyright and you cannot see the actual images contained in it. Now perhaps we can assume that Higbee has a smart enough operation that he will ensure the image copyright information is correct - but IMHO (and attorneys I have consulted) it is always prudent to check whether the image in question for you is actually copyrighted. In order to get the actual images under a specific copyright registration, the copyright office gave me the procedure I listed above. Please let me know if you have found a better way. Thanks.

Might I suggest you consult an attorney that is experienced in copyright law... copyright exists at the moment of creation...registration is not required to afford copyright protection, but it does afford other remedies in regards to infringement. The flaw in the copyright system, which has been spoken about for years now, is that "group registrations", that is many images registered at one time, does not include the "images" in question, so going to DC would still not yield the desired results, but you'd be out 100.00. As I stated before, it would be up to the plaintiff ( if they filed) to prove their case, and that the image(s) in question is included in the registration. You also need to realize the reason is that lawsuits are hardly ever filed is because there is no valid registration in the first place, these trolls simply want to extract money from your account, by using fear tactics..If it were me, rather than spend 100.00 for possibly no results, I would wait and if they file, I would spend a bit more to file a counter suit for a declaratory judgement..in other words I'd flip it back on them and back them into a corner..but thats just me.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on February 15, 2017, 03:24:25 PM
Someco,

Spending $100 to do a blind search for a particular image is an absolute waste of time and money. How many searches will you do?  It is well known that copyright registration/listing system is woefully inadequate. But if you want to spend the time and effort, feel free to report back your results if we are wrong.

The discussion of investing $100 per search is going down a rabbit hole. I am not sure you understand how the extortion scheme works or what is being said to you. Many people who successfully fight and resist their letters use far simpler strategies than trying to comb through the copyright registration system.

And if you do corroborate the image, what do you do then?  You are betting at least $100 that the copyright registration is false.  But what if they say, it's a mistake then offer up another registration for you?  You going to spend yet another $100 for another search?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 19, 2017, 03:45:18 AM
Hello, we also have ongoing situation going on. We believe what they are doing is an abuse of the copyright laws and are building a case against them and Higbee & Associates. We have full complaint details and a form to report your complaint so that we can establish a pattern of behavior. It's located in another forum thread, linked below:

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/legal-controversies-forum/nicholas-youngson-photographer-(rep-by-higbee-associates)-copyright-abuse/ (http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/legal-controversies-forum/nicholas-youngson-photographer-(rep-by-higbee-associates)-copyright-abuse/)

Thanks in advance for everyone's help thus far - we have received many positive replies!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on April 04, 2017, 01:33:12 PM
Matthew and @buddhapi - thanks for your notes. Just want to close this out re. the image search.
I guess you guys see this  day in, day out so it is quite evident to you :) but it's not as obvious to many of us, hence the questions.
" It is well known that copyright registration/listing system is woefully inadequate." - no, I did not know this, pretty much trusted it would have accurate records. Oh well.
And " But what if they say, it's a mistake then offer up another registration for you?" - yes, I suppose they  could do this. I assumed it was "Due diligence" on my part to verify their claims. Saw that others like nycopyrightabuse are also doing this and have even asked Higbee to provide the images included in the registration, which they seem to have refused.
"I am not sure you understand how the extortion scheme works or what is being said to you. Many people who successfully fight and resist their letters use far simpler strategies than trying to comb through the copyright registration system." -
not as much as many on this forum, but I do understand it and have spoken to Matthew and Oscar about it too, in addition to speaking with copyright lawyers and litigation lawyers (dealing with it for a few months now). I have not come across any simpler strategies  than "wait it out and see if they file a lawsuit, or join Oscar's defense letter program (in my case he himself advised against it for now), or hire an attorney to send a letter and/or negotiate a settlement". If there are other strategies you have shared elsewhere on this forum, please do point me to them.
For now I have not spent the $100.
Thanks!

Someco,

Spending $100 to do a blind search for a particular image is an absolute waste of time and money. How many searches will you do?  It is well known that copyright registration/listing system is woefully inadequate. But if you want to spend the time and effort, feel free to report back your results if we are wrong.

The discussion of investing $100 per search is going down a rabbit hole. I am not sure you understand how the extortion scheme works or what is being said to you. Many people who successfully fight and resist their letters use far simpler strategies than trying to comb through the copyright registration system.

And if you do corroborate the image, what do you do then?  You are betting at least $100 that the copyright registration is false.  But what if they say, it's a mistake then offer up another registration for you?  You going to spend yet another $100 for another search?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: someco on April 04, 2017, 01:44:26 PM
Want to share some research that seems relevant to me - ignore if this is already well known on these threads.
Please see http://www.nyphotographic.com/about.html (text quoted below in case these guys take the page down)
It is quite evident as per his own documented timeline that Youngson started  releasing images clearly marked as "CC-attribution sharealike" only after Apr 2015 and even as late as Oct/Dec 2015 presumably not all his images were clearly marked. So if you got his images before say Dec 2015, it's likely that they may have been perceived as public domain.
It's a nuance but an important one IMHO.
Thanks.

--- text ---
News

June 2014

Just found lots of my images being used without a license - I am sure these people don't go around stealing things so what is it about images that makes them feel they can help themselves?

July 2015

For those people that insist on using my images without paying I have now released a number on a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license which means they can be used for free as long as certain attribution and license links are provided close to the image, please contact me for further details.

October 2015

More images released on a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license - a lot of people are following the terms of the license but a lot aren't and just helping themselves to the images so to those people don't use my images without the correct attribution or else paying for them.

December 2015

I am spending my days locating my images that are being used without a valid license, emailing people asking them to pay the license fee and most are ignoring me.

I am now thoroughly fed up with this situation so as from now any site using my images without a valid license and being used to promote a service, I am going to pass straight to my attorney to deal with. I can't be expected to spend my days emailing people infringing my copyright only to get ignored or abused so now they can deal with my attorney.

This only applies to web sites being run to promote a service such as legal services, banks, real estate companies etc - people who should know better than to ignore licensing requirements. Often these sites are managed by professional web site designers who are presumably charging their clients for adding my images to the client's sites without a license!

Sites run by individuals not promoting a service will continue to receive an email asking them for my standard license fee of a few dollars.

April 2016

My advisers have recommended I become incorporated so I now trade as a UK Limited company but everything else remains the same - you can see the company details on my contact page.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 05, 2017, 02:36:02 PM
That is the power of the ELI community. We have different people who come in out of nowhere who are inspired by our "fightback and creative learn-to-think" attitude.

Case in point, nycopyrightabuse came out of nowhere. Never met them or heard of them. But suddenly, there is all this information, research, and commentary that compelled me to give the Youngson situation a second, closer look.

And even the debate about paying $100 to do copyright registration searches is helpful to readers as I think it rarely comes up.  So everyone benefits from the discussion.

The two most important things people need to get is:  Get Educated and Get an Attitude.  When you get these two things under your belt, people won't fall and get lost into the rabbit holes and diversionary tactics that copyright collection folks use.

Most people think the pursuers don't have anything to lose by using questionable or egregious tactics pursuing people with reckless abandon. They do!  Anyone that doesn't believe what I say can go Google Righthaven and Prenda Law.  They were brought down by the collective effort of outraged people and put out of business.

There are other parties ELI has discussed previously whom I will not name that have exited the business. They were pretty happy to take advantage of people's legal ignorance and use some scummy tactics but then when they were called out on it and exposed, they didn't last long.

People inherently know what is fair and not fair, reasonable and not reasonable.  And there is no question that the team of Higbee/Youngson sending out $5,000 letters over $10 images (or free with attribution) is unreasonable. If any knowledgeable judge saw this in a court case, the Higbee/Youngson team would have a LOT to defend and might even get reprimanded for bringing in a lawsuit of this kind into their court.

All it takes is for Higbee/Youngson to hit the wrong person to set off a chain reaction.

Matthew and @buddhapi - thanks for your notes. Just want to close this out re. the image search.
I guess you guys see this  day in, day out so it is quite evident to you :) but it's not as obvious to many of us, hence the questions.

" It is well known that copyright registration/listing system is woefully inadequate." - no, I did not know this, pretty much trusted it would have accurate records. Oh well.

And " But what if they say, it's a mistake then offer up another registration for you?" - yes, I suppose they  could do this. I assumed it was "Due diligence" on my part to verify their claims. Saw that others like nycopyrightabuse are also doing this and have even asked Higbee to provide the images included in the registration, which they seem to have refused.

"I am not sure you understand how the extortion scheme works or what is being said to you. Many people who successfully fight and resist their letters use far simpler strategies than trying to comb through the copyright registration system." -
not as much as many on this forum, but I do understand it and have spoken to Matthew and Oscar about it too, in addition to speaking with copyright lawyers and litigation lawyers (dealing with it for a few months now). I have not come across any simpler strategies  than "wait it out and see if they file a lawsuit, or join Oscar's defense letter program (in my case he himself advised against it for now), or hire an attorney to send a letter and/or negotiate a settlement". If there are other strategies you have shared elsewhere on this forum, please do point me to them.
For now I have not spent the $100.
Thanks!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 05, 2017, 02:47:07 PM
Let me be clear. I do believe infringements are rampant on the Internet. It is an issue.  I don't really have a problem with folks sending warning or notification letters. But it starts getting in to grey areas when you start demanding and expecting to get money from people out of the blue and start making it into a profit center vs. a stop-loss approach.

And the pursuers regularly LIE with reckless abandon about filing lawsuits, taking legal action, etc.

Youngson (and all artists) have some say over how Higbee works. But they like the easy finances.  Send out a $5,000 letter.  Settle for $3,000. Higbee gets 30% of that take.  Youngson gets the other 70%. See how easy that works?

The problem is in the sausage-making which is something people associated with Higbee and their ilk don't ever want to openly discuss which ELI reports.

We have exposed and shown people the ugliness of the sausage-making activities they engage in. 

If I were to believe his narrative as posted in his timeline, Youngson is extremely misguided or misinformed and the resulting blowback has not been kind to him. Part of the problem is he (as some others) have fallen for the story Higbee has sold.

Want to share some research that seems relevant to me - ignore if this is already well known on these threads.
Please see http://www.nyphotographic.com/about.html (text quoted below in case these guys take the page down)
It is quite evident as per his own documented timeline that Youngson started  releasing images clearly marked as "CC-attribution sharealike" only after Apr 2015 and even as late as Oct/Dec 2015 presumably not all his images were clearly marked. So if you got his images before say Dec 2015, it's likely that they may have been perceived as public domain.
It's a nuance but an important one IMHO.
Thanks.

--- text ---
News

June 2014

Just found lots of my images being used without a license - I am sure these people don't go around stealing things so what is it about images that makes them feel they can help themselves?

July 2015

For those people that insist on using my images without paying I have now released a number on a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license which means they can be used for free as long as certain attribution and license links are provided close to the image, please contact me for further details.

October 2015

More images released on a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license - a lot of people are following the terms of the license but a lot aren't and just helping themselves to the images so to those people don't use my images without the correct attribution or else paying for them.

December 2015

I am spending my days locating my images that are being used without a valid license, emailing people asking them to pay the license fee and most are ignoring me.

I am now thoroughly fed up with this situation so as from now any site using my images without a valid license and being used to promote a service, I am going to pass straight to my attorney to deal with. I can't be expected to spend my days emailing people infringing my copyright only to get ignored or abused so now they can deal with my attorney.

This only applies to web sites being run to promote a service such as legal services, banks, real estate companies etc - people who should know better than to ignore licensing requirements. Often these sites are managed by professional web site designers who are presumably charging their clients for adding my images to the client's sites without a license!

Sites run by individuals not promoting a service will continue to receive an email asking them for my standard license fee of a few dollars.

April 2016

My advisers have recommended I become incorporated so I now trade as a UK Limited company but everything else remains the same - you can see the company details on my contact page.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: pctechguy1 on April 08, 2017, 06:13:32 PM
Just got documents in the mail from Higbee concerning Nicholas Youngson. Higbee now claims it is representing RM Media, Ltd instead of Youngson. Enclosed in the letter is a copy of court papers showing RM Meda, LTD. as Plaintiff stating COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL. The problem is that there is NO CASE NO.

Looks like this is another way that Higbee is intimidating people to pay the $5000.00 extortion fee. They started mailing out these demands and sending emails around December, 2016.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kingkendall on April 09, 2017, 10:07:05 AM
It's another scare tactic CT use to induce a settlement.  Instead of a file number the put "pending" to make you think they're getting ready to file if you don't pay up.  And for a lot of people it works because they get scared.  Sanders Law uses the same tactic.  It's part of the game. 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 10, 2017, 04:38:27 PM
Yes, we know about "RM Media Ltd" and the unfiled boilerplate lawsuit template that they send to people as a tactic.  They want you to "imagine" and "visualize" a possible lawsuit.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/photog-nick-youngson-(higbee-assoc-)-lists-rm-media-ltd-in-template-lawsuit/

Just got documents in the mail from Higbee concerning Nicholas Youngson. Higbee now claims it is representing RM Media, Ltd instead of Youngson. Enclosed in the letter is a copy of court papers showing RM Meda, LTD. as Plaintiff stating COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL. The problem is that there is NO CASE NO.

Looks like this is another way that Higbee is intimidating people to pay the $5000.00 extortion fee. They started mailing out these demands and sending emails around December, 2016.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on April 14, 2017, 01:27:22 PM
We've been dealing with this very same issue on an image from Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com since the Fall of 2016. Exact same problem as others (accidental problem on the image's attribution under CC 3.0), dealing with Higbee and Ass.

I immediately deleted the image from our server and took down the page it was on (where it got a whopping 11 pageviews). We offered to settle out of court for a small but very reasonable sum of money. They refused it, and went from asking for $5,000 to $2,000. Then I asked for further proof Youngson owns the image as it's supposedly part of a group of images with a copyright and (as mentioned by another poster here) the proof of registration doesn't directly reference the image itself.

In addition to asking a specialist at Higbee for sales info on the image and an explanation of how Youngson calculated $2,000 in (out-of court) compensation, I (at Higbee's suggestion) made a few inquiries to the US Copyright Office about getting a deposit of registration, but the process has been very slow, and I've yet to hear back from the Copyright Office.

All communication with Higbee has been via email, with "Daniela Lupean, Claims Resolution Specialist - Copyright Enforcement Division."

The case sat as-is for months, with the occasional email and voicemail from Higbee, wondering how things are going with the copyright proof.

Then, in early April, they escalated things and threatened to go to court if they didn't hear back in 24 hours. I sent an email and after some more back and forth, I set up a phone call with the specialist for today (April 14). But after finding this thread a few days ago, I canceled the phone call and offered another reasonable amount of money, though much lower than $2,000. I also said that if Youngson refuses the offer, we'll need to see the info I requested before considering a greater sum. I also told the specialist that if they need to talk to me they can do so via email or leave me a voicemail message.

Today, my employer got the following email (I've deleted some info) ...

Quote
From: Mathew Higbee <mhigbee@higbeeassociates.com>
Subject: Copyright Claim -
Date: April 14, 2017 11:44:13 AM CDT

Mr. XX-

This case has been moved to the litigation team.    I am now your point of contact on this case.    Ms. Lupean forwarded your last email to me.

The documentation that we have provided is more than sufficient to demonstrate the validity of the claim.  A quick search of the internet will provide you with an abundance of evidence that supports the validity of who we are, who are client is and the ownership of the image that you used.  If that facts were other that what we represent, we would be committing fraud and we would be liable under civil and criminal law.  If you want me to provide more supporting documentation, I can, but it will end up making this case more expensive for you as the client will pass on the cost to you.   

As this is a timely registered image, i you were to prove to the court that your infringement was unintentional, the mimum amount you would have to pay would be $750 plus court costs and our client’s attorneys fees.  If the court does not believe your unintentional defense and finds that the infringement was willful, the mimunim amount a judge could award would be $35,000 plus court costs and our client’s attorneys fees.

Our client has already incurred substantial costs tracking down the infringement and documenting it,  and our law firm has already spent considerable time communicating with you regarding the case.   As a last chance offer to avoid litigation,  I will give you a one-time offer of $1,250 ($750 statutory damages + $500 for our time)  to settle this case.  This offer expires Monday morning, at which time we will prepare the case for litigation.  We will also present this offer as evidence to the court that we made earnest efforts and reasonable offers to resolve this case, and ask the court increase award to our client as a result of your forcing this claim to be resolved in the courts.

My review of the Wisconsin Secretary of State records leads me to believe that this is a single owner or closely help LLC and, based on the chronology showing multiple times that the corporation has lost its standing (which leads me to believe that corporate formalities are not well maintained and piercing the corporate veil would be easy), I would recommend that my client name you personally on the law suit.   

An offer of $1250  is a dramatic reduction by my client.  I hope you make the smart business decision and accept this offer.   If you have additional questions or wish to accept the offer, please contact me by email or phone at 714-617-8352 (my direct line).

-Mat
Mathew K. Higbee
Attorney at Law

TL;DR
"As a last chance offer to avoid litigation,  I will give you a one-time offer of $1,250 ($750 statutory damages + $500 for our time)  to settle this case.  This offer expires Monday morning."

This is the first time Higbee himself has sent a message.

Any thoughts on what to do now? I'm inclined to ignore it or offer an third, small amount of money.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kingkendall on April 14, 2017, 02:12:13 PM
@ InWisconsin

I would've ignored them from the beginning.  But, since you already made offers, I would go ahead with the third offer. I'm not keen on group resgistration being proof enough for a particular image.  Higbee saying it's been refered to their litigation dept is really the next cubicle over from the past person dealing with the case.  It's a tactic meant to shake you. 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on April 14, 2017, 02:24:49 PM
@ kingkendall

Thanks for the reply! Wish we had ignored them right away. Ah well.

The thing is, I HIGHLY doubt they will accept my third offer, as it will be quite low, yet extremely generous for the limited use of an image offered for free.

If their email is to be believed, they've spent $500 emailing with me since October.

I may just let it go.

Thanks again!
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 14, 2017, 02:25:43 PM
Mathew Higbee needs an English tutor..
"who are client is"....
"If that facts were other that what we represent,"....
"As this is a timely registered image, i you were to prove"....
" the mimum amount you would have to pay"...
"this is a single owner or closely help LLC and".....

He could at least use a basic spell checker for.. this emal really makes Mathew Higbee look like a moron, no wonder nobody takes him seriously.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on April 14, 2017, 02:28:40 PM
@ Robert Krausankas

So true.

Also, according to his email, he prefers to be called "Mat."
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: kingkendall on April 14, 2017, 03:05:24 PM
@ kingkendall

Thanks for the reply! Wish we had ignored them right away. Ah well.

The thing is, I HIGHLY doubt they will accept my third offer, as it will be quite low, yet extremely generous for the limited use of an image offered for free.

If their email is to be believed, they've spent $500 emailing with me since October.

I may just let it go.

Thanks again!

@ InWisconsin
I wasn’t knocking what you did as an error on your part.  In fact, you acted like a gentlemen seeking to resolve an issue in good faith.  But, that’s not the case with Higbee in the way he conducts business with threats and intimidation.  He wanted you to fold after the first communication.  But you didn’t.    A lot of others do and that’s where he makes his money.  By the way, that email I’m pretty sure didn’t come from Higbee himself.  It probably came from a case manager (non-lawyer) he’s paying $18-$23 dollors to run this extortion operation.  And if it did come from Higbee what does that say about his professionalism. 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on April 14, 2017, 03:14:46 PM
@ kingkendall

No worries! As others on this thread have mentioned, it's so good to know how many people are in this boat. Thanks so much for the info on Higbee. 

Hey, fun fact: I actually emailed Youngson right when this all started, asking how to properly cite his images, and he politely responded. I quoted his reply in an email to Higbee and they were not happy about it. Just kinda funny.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 14, 2017, 05:03:49 PM
" By the way, that email I’m pretty sure didn’t come from Higbee himself.  It probably came from a case manager (non-lawyer) he’s paying $18-$23 dollars to run this extortion operation.  And if it did come from Higbee what does that say about his professionalism.  "

Either way, Higbee is a dolt..just a matter of time until Yungson picks the wrong target and gets a declaratory lawsuit filed against him..
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 15, 2017, 09:21:27 AM
They got back at it yesterday, someone new (an Associate Attorney) calling and sending an email to my employer. Here's the bulk of the email from the Law Offices of Higbee & Associates ...

Quote
I am an attorney with The Law Firm of Higbee & Associates, my email is in regard to the copyright claim involving [YOU].

I am attempting to contact you regarding a settlement agreement for a copyright claim you had with my client.

Please contact me if you are interested in settling this outside of court. Should I not hear from you, I will advise my client to pursue this in federal court.

So there's that. Seems like more of the same. The other deadlines they gave us before legal action came and went. This is the first we've heard from them in months. 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 02:11:25 PM
Alright, let's hold the phone here. I don't know anything about your case other than what I read here.

If what you are saying is that you have a private website and that this dispute is a private matter between Higbee and you, why is Higbee contacting your employer?  They should not be calling there at all!  You need to document each and every time they have contacted you through your employer. There may be grounds for a serious complaint and even potentially a lawsuit.

For example, if you suffered, penalized, demoted, or fired at your workplace because of the inappropriate Higbee calls on behalf of his client, then you might have a claim against Higbee and the photographer!

You need to understand that if it was so easy to get $35K out of you as they are claiming, they wouldn't be using time talking to you. They would be paying $400 filing fees and get the show on the road to get that $35K.

Assuming they filed a lawsuit, it is perfectly legal to NOT accept service.  It is also legal to NOT hire a lawyer to defend it. You could, in theory, write a letter to the court explaining your situation to mitigate any potential claims they make to tone down a default judgment. Default judgments are notoriously difficult to collect upon if they hit the wrong defendant.

As has been said many times, the harder people fight, the better the settlement. They have continued to lower the amount. AT some point, every person has to decide for themselves what is best for them to settle or not settle.

But there is something very fishy in the story. There have been more reports that Higbee employees are getting more assertive about calling people. However, I never heard anything about them calling anyone's workplace.  That is a serious no-no.  IN fact, you need to write them to cease-and-desist calling your place of employment.  And as a backup measure, I would go visit a couple of personal injury lawyers. They generally will give some free consultations or point you in the right direction.

If someone called me at my place of employment without my permission over a private matter, the whole landscape would quickly be flipped. My impression is that there is an overzealous employee calling but they have just exposed Higbee and his law firm to some complaints.

You see, they have no problems pushing the envelope because most victims don't know what is allowed or not allowed.  And this whole business calling people at work over a private matter is an ABSOLUTE NO!

Quote
Today, my employer got the following email (I've deleted some info) ...

Quote
From: Mathew Higbee <mhigbee@higbeeassociates.com>
Subject: Copyright Claim -
Date: April 14, 2017 11:44:13 AM CDT

Mr. XX-

This case has been moved to the litigation team.    I am now your point of contact on this case.    Ms. Lupean forwarded your last email to me.

The documentation that we have provided is more than sufficient to demonstrate the validity of the claim.  A quick search of the internet will provide you with an abundance of evidence that supports the validity of who we are, who are client is and the ownership of the image that you used.  If that facts were other that what we represent, we would be committing fraud and we would be liable under civil and criminal law.  If you want me to provide more supporting documentation, I can, but it will end up making this case more expensive for you as the client will pass on the cost to you.   

As this is a timely registered image, i you were to prove to the court that your infringement was unintentional, the mimum amount you would have to pay would be $750 plus court costs and our client’s attorneys fees.  If the court does not believe your unintentional defense and finds that the infringement was willful, the mimunim amount a judge could award would be $35,000 plus court costs and our client’s attorneys fees.

Our client has already incurred substantial costs tracking down the infringement and documenting it,  and our law firm has already spent considerable time communicating with you regarding the case.   As a last chance offer to avoid litigation,  I will give you a one-time offer of $1,250 ($750 statutory damages + $500 for our time)  to settle this case.  This offer expires Monday morning, at which time we will prepare the case for litigation.  We will also present this offer as evidence to the court that we made earnest efforts and reasonable offers to resolve this case, and ask the court increase award to our client as a result of your forcing this claim to be resolved in the courts.

My review of the Wisconsin Secretary of State records leads me to believe that this is a single owner or closely help LLC and, based on the chronology showing multiple times that the corporation has lost its standing (which leads me to believe that corporate formalities are not well maintained and piercing the corporate veil would be easy), I would recommend that my client name you personally on the law suit.   

An offer of $1250  is a dramatic reduction by my client.  I hope you make the smart business decision and accept this offer.   If you have additional questions or wish to accept the offer, please contact me by email or phone at 714-617-8352 (my direct line).

-Mat
Mathew K. Higbee
Attorney at Law
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 15, 2017, 02:20:38 PM
Hi Matthew – thanks so much for the reply.

But I should have been more clear – I work for a small magazine that Highbee is trying to scare. After months and months of back and forth (including me offering fair amounts of money in compensation) Highbee is calling our owner now. Our owner is the first person they contacted and then I took over communications.

This is not a case of Highbee calling an employer unrelated to the case.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 02:22:07 PM
I want to add something here.  The issue of financial standing and position is important, in my view.  For people where money is an issue, there was no income, and you cannot afford a lawyer, the best you can hope for is state your position. And the offer of settlement can't be ridiculously low.

No one should be settling anything if it means they can't pay rent, groceries, a car payment, utilities, etc. This is NOT a debt, it is a claim. And too many people are trying to "outlawyer" and "outspeak" the claims. Most people will never succeed. It is a waste of time and energy.

He criticizes that you are a small LLC who let things lapse.  Well, that also implies that you are not well financed either.

People who have the least amount of money should be the ones that fear the least because there is nothing to collect. It will be an entirely waste of real money to get a paper judgment and I am quite confident Higbee knows that.

Right now, it is a game of chicken. He has little to lose to make a "final offer". There is no negative consequence for making that because it isn't binding. 

Again, I am not telling you to NOT settle but it is pretty clear Higbee is trying to manipulate you to cough up some money. He claims it is his client but THEY stand to get their 33% commission. Never forget that.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 15, 2017, 02:27:27 PM
Thanks for the insight, Matthew, it's much appreciated.

I believe the financial "standing" thing mentioned was from over 10 years ago and it only happened once and resulted in a fine of less than $50 or something like that.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 02:28:45 PM
If the owner is the one being threatened, why is your owner hiding beyond you? You cannot make a decision for the owner.  What kind of an owner is he?  Does he think you are more knowledgeable and experienced than him? Is he expecting you to negotiate away the matter?

The owner is going to have to get some stones and make a stand somewhere. He is going to have to choose to take the call or not. (I wouldn't. Keep all communications in writing to cover yourself. People have a tendency to say too much.)

People who don't issue a cease-and-desist request on the phone call matter are being foolish. That is why they keep calling. No one has issued a cease-and-desist request to keep communications in writing.  There are some exceptions but generally most victims are terrible on the phone.

Hi Matthew – thanks so much for the reply.

But I should have been more clear – I work for a small magazine that Highbee is trying to scare. After months and months of back and forth (including me offering fair amounts of money in compensation) Highbee is calling our owner now. Our owner is the first person they contacted and then I took over communications.

This is not a case of Highbee calling an employer unrelated to the case.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 02:33:55 PM
Courts are not just going to sweep away the "corporate veil" based on Higbee's say so.  If your employer keeps business records, a separate checking account, uses the corporate name, and files and taxes properly, that is generally a strong basis of maintaining corporate protection. A late filing happens which is why they have late fees. Late filing happen to many businesses.  That is not a big deal.

However, there are many sloppy business people who regularly co-mingle personal funds and business funds. That is a no-no. The occasional stray personal transaction that shows up on a business account won't destroy corporate protections.  However, if your employer is using the business account like a personal checking account paying his mortgage, groceries, utilities, etc. that is an area of concern.

However, even then, that isn't public record and Higbee would have to expend time and effort on that front. He would probably have to demonstrate good cause as well.

Things are just not as simple as it seems. Hence, all the begging and cajoling for your employer's money.


Thanks for the insight, Matthew, it's much appreciated.

I believe the financial "standing" thing mentioned was from over 10 years ago and it only happened once and resulted in a fine of less than $50 or something like that.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 15, 2017, 02:37:48 PM
At this point I do know a bit more about these matters than my employer, and I don't feel he's hiding behind me. I feel in our situation, thus far, it's been appropriate for me to handle the communication. But maybe that's changing. We discussed the matter and decided to "not take the call."

We've never spoken to anyone from Higbee on the phone and I have asked them to communicate via email but I've never direct said "do not call us."

Also – my employer is pretty strict about business / personal separation. Thanks again for the insight.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 02:57:59 PM
Well, it sounds like your employer will have to decide where to make a stand. It comes down to his risk tolerance. If you guys really want to settle, no way they will take less than $500.  But that doesn't mean to offer $501 either if you want to dispose of this.  Offer $750 statutory damages if you want to make a "legit Offer" and then stand by it.  Not a half-ass $750 and then waffle on it. It is part of real-world negotiation to know where your line in the sand is.

People try to make all these legal arguments when it almost always comes down to a test of wills. I spoke to a guy recently who was so immersed in the legal arguments, he lost sight of the end goal was. He denied it but he wanted so badly to convince his accuser of his legal argument. I told him, then go spend $300-500 per hour and hire a lawyer to dig out legal research for you.

Higbee knows what he got himself into when he signed onboard. Cry me a river on his $500 "time".  He knows that many people pay ZIPPO.

It sounds to me you guys are in a "soft" position here. If the back and forth is too much and the risk prospects is too unpleasant, make a "real offer".  $750 statutory damages and that is it.

At this point I do know a bit more about these matters than my employer, and I don't feel he's hiding behind me. I feel in our situation, thus far, it's been appropriate for me to handle the communication. But maybe that's changing. We discussed the matter and decided to "not take the call."

We've never spoken to anyone from Higbee on the phone and I have asked them to communicate via email but I've never direct said "do not call us."

Also – my employer is pretty strict about business / personal separation. Thanks again for the insight.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on June 15, 2017, 03:04:28 PM
I would like to remind everyone that Nick Youngson situation is fraught with a "honeypot" smell and people should remember that.

And Nick Youngson is in the UK and someone would likely have to invest the money to fly from the UK to testify in any theoretical lawsuit.  And Nick would get some nice publicity along the way.

For me, victims would do well to remember this.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 15, 2017, 03:08:23 PM
Again, thank you, Matthew. Much appreciated info and insight.

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: InWisconsin on June 19, 2017, 04:54:39 PM
Today we got a packet from Higbee in the mail that I believe others have described on this thread – a letter giving us 15 days to pay a "firm settlement of $5,000" and a copy of a Complaint they will file if we don't (unfiled, no case #, etc.). And yes, instead of Youngson, the client is now RM Media, Ltd.

I just feel inclined to ignore it as they've let multiple deadlines like this pass. As far as  I know, neither Youngson nor RM Media has ever gone to court. It seems like it would be so costly to go to court for them for what they might get out of it. We offered them a fair amount of money (in our mind) which they have reused.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: clist on June 19, 2017, 11:28:28 PM
...5 bucks says RM = "Rights Managed"....   ::)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: TedStryker on August 15, 2017, 10:20:10 AM
I received one of these Higbee demand letters in February 2017 through a website I run. At first, I was a little nervous and then I Googled and came out to this site. I'm a lawyer and I knew things were fishy before even coming to this great resource.

1. I found it odd that they sent a demand through regular mail. Usually, in important legal papers, I at least use tracking.

2. The $5,000 demand bears in no relationship to any damages that Youngson could have for a page that maybe had 200 views on it. I deleted the photo after I got the initial paperwork.

3. The whole honeypot scam of labeling the photos for reuse in Google Images when it should be labeled as commercial or reuse with modification since you have to attribute or pay the license.

4. The whole license fee of $10. How can he demand $5,000 in damages when he'll sell the picture for $10?

5. The whole licensing thing is a scam because if you pay the $10, Youngson provides no licensing agreement. When does it start, when does it end? Will he still claim damages from someone who bought a license from him.

6. The people calling you on the phones aren't lawyers. Anyone who ever went to law school would understand their demands aren't reasonable.

7. Higbee hasn't sued on this because it would expose the Honeypot scam. There is more money in getting $500 to $1250 settlements from companies who don't know better or don't want to hire an attorney than filing an actual lawsuit.

I ignored the calls and I've ignored the threats that they are forwarding this to their litigation team. It's 6 months later. If they wanted to sue me, they would have already.





Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on August 16, 2017, 04:12:32 PM
My comments inline...

I received one of these Higbee demand letters in February 2017 through a website I run. At first, I was a little nervous and then I Googled and came out to this site. I'm a lawyer and I knew things were fishy before even coming to this great resource.

Welcome, glad to have you here!

1. I found it odd that they sent a demand through regular mail. Usually, in important legal papers, I at least use tracking.

In the "old" days (pre-2012), almost everything we saw was through regular mail but then gradually we began seeing copyright claim emails which has almost become the norm today. I estimate there are literally thousands of copyright claims each year.  It is all based on most people's legal ignorance. The emails are generally as effective as sending a snail-mail letter.

2. The $5,000 demand bears in no relationship to any damages that Youngson could have for a page that maybe had 200 views on it. I deleted the photo after I got the initial paperwork.

Absolutely correct  The $5K number is made up and arbitrary. We see that number for most people.

3. The whole honeypot scam of labeling the photos for reuse in Google Images when it should be labeled as commercial or reuse with modification since you have to attribute or pay the license.

The Nick Youngson website operation is so shoddy and the wording and disclosures are so bad, I didn't even know it was his website until another victim reported his findings and it compelled me to give a closer look. He promotes his "free images" so hard that people are falling for it left and right and put into a "gotcha" situation.

4. The whole license fee of $10. How can he demand $5,000 in damages when he'll sell the picture for $10?

That is correct. It is far above even the $750 minimum statutory damages assuming he even registers his images.

5. The whole licensing thing is a scam because if you pay the $10, Youngson provides no licensing agreement. When does it start, when does it end? Will he still claim damages from someone who bought a license from him.

I have not heard from anyone paying the $10. Did you pay $10? Is that what you are saying?

6. The people calling you on the phones aren't lawyers. Anyone who ever went to law school would understand their demands aren't reasonable.

Yup, the people on the phones are generally low-level hourly clerks. They do the grunt work.

7. Higbee hasn't sued on this because it would expose the Honeypot scam. There is more money in getting $500 to $1250 settlements from companies who don't know better or don't want to hire an attorney than filing an actual lawsuit.

That is what I have been saying. I rarely call anything a "honeypot" scheme because most victims got their images from Google Images and any number of places.  But with Nick Youngson, he promotes "free" images with crappy disclosures, then nails people for making dumb mistakes on giving credit.

I ignored the calls and I've ignored the threats that they are forwarding this to their litigation team. It's 6 months later. If they wanted to sue me, they would have already.

I agree with you that people should not return calls. In fact, people should save the voice messages. I am interested in hearing more of them. I disagree with you on the rationale of their not filing a lawsuit within 6 months. Many copyright lawsuits are filed between Years 2 & 3 when it becomes clear that months-long efforts to settle have been exhausted. IN particular, Nick Youngson filing a lawsuit is currently unlikely because of the way he operated.  His active promotion of "free" images and lack of clear disclosures is a big problem in my view.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: say_no_to_extortion on September 12, 2017, 02:36:54 PM
Just received the same template and request for +$5,000. Has anyone dealing with Nick Youngson/Higbee resolved their situation?
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 14, 2017, 08:33:07 PM
You resolve the matter by negotiating a settlement. Otherwise, you have to live with the uncertainty for the next 3 years.

People who settle the matter will generally not say anything publicly. They will also not generally not share what they settle for but I am confident people can settle for much less than the $5K.  However, it is still a lot to settle for most people.

Ultimately, people have to make their own "resolution" if you elect not to negotiate or settle the matter.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: TedStryker on October 15, 2017, 02:44:15 PM
I actually paid the $10, I feel that if someone is complaining that you violated their copyright, but agree to sell you a license for $10, then they can't claim you owe them $5,000 in damages.

To show the nonsense of Higbee, I did answer the call from one of their "staff". I told them that I bought a license. They checked with Youngson and said that I bought the license for them after their initial claim. They still wanted to negotiate a settlement.

I asked the staff member if they were an attorney and of course, they denied that they were and claimed they never said they were one. I said that I knew by the way they communicated and their understanding of the law, they clearly weren't an attorney.

I told them that when it came to a settlement, I demanded money from Youngson for breach of my licensing agreement. Needless to say, I haven't heard back.



My comments inline...

I received one of these Higbee demand letters in February 2017 through a website I run. At first, I was a little nervous and then I Googled and came out to this site. I'm a lawyer and I knew things were fishy before even coming to this great resource.

Welcome, glad to have you here!

1. I found it odd that they sent a demand through regular mail. Usually, in important legal papers, I at least use tracking.

In the "old" days (pre-2012), almost everything we saw was through regular mail but then gradually we began seeing copyright claim emails which has almost become the norm today. I estimate there are literally thousands of copyright claims each year.  It is all based on most people's legal ignorance. The emails are generally as effective as sending a snail-mail letter.

2. The $5,000 demand bears in no relationship to any damages that Youngson could have for a page that maybe had 200 views on it. I deleted the photo after I got the initial paperwork.

Absolutely correct  The $5K number is made up and arbitrary. We see that number for most people.

3. The whole honeypot scam of labeling the photos for reuse in Google Images when it should be labeled as commercial or reuse with modification since you have to attribute or pay the license.

The Nick Youngson website operation is so shoddy and the wording and disclosures are so bad, I didn't even know it was his website until another victim reported his findings and it compelled me to give a closer look. He promotes his "free images" so hard that people are falling for it left and right and put into a "gotcha" situation.

4. The whole license fee of $10. How can he demand $5,000 in damages when he'll sell the picture for $10?

That is correct. It is far above even the $750 minimum statutory damages assuming he even registers his images.

5. The whole licensing thing is a scam because if you pay the $10, Youngson provides no licensing agreement. When does it start, when does it end? Will he still claim damages from someone who bought a license from him.

I have not heard from anyone paying the $10. Did you pay $10? Is that what you are saying?

6. The people calling you on the phones aren't lawyers. Anyone who ever went to law school would understand their demands aren't reasonable.

Yup, the people on the phones are generally low-level hourly clerks. They do the grunt work.

7. Higbee hasn't sued on this because it would expose the Honeypot scam. There is more money in getting $500 to $1250 settlements from companies who don't know better or don't want to hire an attorney than filing an actual lawsuit.

That is what I have been saying. I rarely call anything a "honeypot" scheme because most victims got their images from Google Images and any number of places.  But with Nick Youngson, he promotes "free" images with crappy disclosures, then nails people for making dumb mistakes on giving credit.

I ignored the calls and I've ignored the threats that they are forwarding this to their litigation team. It's 6 months later. If they wanted to sue me, they would have already.

I agree with you that people should not return calls. In fact, people should save the voice messages. I am interested in hearing more of them. I disagree with you on the rationale of their not filing a lawsuit within 6 months. Many copyright lawsuits are filed between Years 2 & 3 when it becomes clear that months-long efforts to settle have been exhausted. IN particular, Nick Youngson filing a lawsuit is currently unlikely because of the way he operated.  His active promotion of "free" images and lack of clear disclosures is a big problem in my view.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: icepick on October 15, 2017, 03:33:35 PM
Just curious, how is Youngson breaching the license agreement you have with him?


I actually paid the $10, I feel that if someone is complaining that you violated their copyright, but agree to sell you a license for $10, then they can't claim you owe them $5,000 in damages.

To show the nonsense of Higbee, I did answer the call from one of their "staff". I told them that I bought a license. They checked with Youngson and said that I bought the license for them after their initial claim. They still wanted to negotiate a settlement.

I asked the staff member if they were an attorney and of course, they denied that they were and claimed they never said they were one. I said that I knew by the way they communicated and their understanding of the law, they clearly weren't an attorney.

I told them that when it came to a settlement, I demanded money from Youngson for breach of my licensing agreement. Needless to say, I haven't heard back.



My comments inline...

I received one of these Higbee demand letters in February 2017 through a website I run. At first, I was a little nervous and then I Googled and came out to this site. I'm a lawyer and I knew things were fishy before even coming to this great resource.

Welcome, glad to have you here!

1. I found it odd that they sent a demand through regular mail. Usually, in important legal papers, I at least use tracking.

In the "old" days (pre-2012), almost everything we saw was through regular mail but then gradually we began seeing copyright claim emails which has almost become the norm today. I estimate there are literally thousands of copyright claims each year.  It is all based on most people's legal ignorance. The emails are generally as effective as sending a snail-mail letter.

2. The $5,000 demand bears in no relationship to any damages that Youngson could have for a page that maybe had 200 views on it. I deleted the photo after I got the initial paperwork.

Absolutely correct  The $5K number is made up and arbitrary. We see that number for most people.

3. The whole honeypot scam of labeling the photos for reuse in Google Images when it should be labeled as commercial or reuse with modification since you have to attribute or pay the license.

The Nick Youngson website operation is so shoddy and the wording and disclosures are so bad, I didn't even know it was his website until another victim reported his findings and it compelled me to give a closer look. He promotes his "free images" so hard that people are falling for it left and right and put into a "gotcha" situation.

4. The whole license fee of $10. How can he demand $5,000 in damages when he'll sell the picture for $10?

That is correct. It is far above even the $750 minimum statutory damages assuming he even registers his images.

5. The whole licensing thing is a scam because if you pay the $10, Youngson provides no licensing agreement. When does it start, when does it end? Will he still claim damages from someone who bought a license from him.

I have not heard from anyone paying the $10. Did you pay $10? Is that what you are saying?

6. The people calling you on the phones aren't lawyers. Anyone who ever went to law school would understand their demands aren't reasonable.

Yup, the people on the phones are generally low-level hourly clerks. They do the grunt work.

7. Higbee hasn't sued on this because it would expose the Honeypot scam. There is more money in getting $500 to $1250 settlements from companies who don't know better or don't want to hire an attorney than filing an actual lawsuit.

That is what I have been saying. I rarely call anything a "honeypot" scheme because most victims got their images from Google Images and any number of places.  But with Nick Youngson, he promotes "free" images with crappy disclosures, then nails people for making dumb mistakes on giving credit.

I ignored the calls and I've ignored the threats that they are forwarding this to their litigation team. It's 6 months later. If they wanted to sue me, they would have already.

I agree with you that people should not return calls. In fact, people should save the voice messages. I am interested in hearing more of them. I disagree with you on the rationale of their not filing a lawsuit within 6 months. Many copyright lawsuits are filed between Years 2 & 3 when it becomes clear that months-long efforts to settle have been exhausted. IN particular, Nick Youngson filing a lawsuit is currently unlikely because of the way he operated.  His active promotion of "free" images and lack of clear disclosures is a big problem in my view.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: TedStryker on October 15, 2017, 04:59:12 PM
I paid $10 for a license and he threatened to sue me.

I understand the timing aspect of it. But if he was insistent that I violated his copyright for $5,000, why would he accept a license fee of $10 from me?


Just curious, how is Youngson breaching the license agreement you have with him?


I actually paid the $10, I feel that if someone is complaining that you violated their copyright, but agree to sell you a license for $10, then they can't claim you owe them $5,000 in damages.

To show the nonsense of Higbee, I did answer the call from one of their "staff". I told them that I bought a license. They checked with Youngson and said that I bought the license for them after their initial claim. They still wanted to negotiate a settlement.

I asked the staff member if they were an attorney and of course, they denied that they were and claimed they never said they were one. I said that I knew by the way they communicated and their understanding of the law, they clearly weren't an attorney.

I told them that when it came to a settlement, I demanded money from Youngson for breach of my licensing agreement. Needless to say, I haven't heard back.



My comments inline...

I received one of these Higbee demand letters in February 2017 through a website I run. At first, I was a little nervous and then I Googled and came out to this site. I'm a lawyer and I knew things were fishy before even coming to this great resource.

Welcome, glad to have you here!

1. I found it odd that they sent a demand through regular mail. Usually, in important legal papers, I at least use tracking.

In the "old" days (pre-2012), almost everything we saw was through regular mail but then gradually we began seeing copyright claim emails which has almost become the norm today. I estimate there are literally thousands of copyright claims each year.  It is all based on most people's legal ignorance. The emails are generally as effective as sending a snail-mail letter.

2. The $5,000 demand bears in no relationship to any damages that Youngson could have for a page that maybe had 200 views on it. I deleted the photo after I got the initial paperwork.

Absolutely correct  The $5K number is made up and arbitrary. We see that number for most people.

3. The whole honeypot scam of labeling the photos for reuse in Google Images when it should be labeled as commercial or reuse with modification since you have to attribute or pay the license.

The Nick Youngson website operation is so shoddy and the wording and disclosures are so bad, I didn't even know it was his website until another victim reported his findings and it compelled me to give a closer look. He promotes his "free images" so hard that people are falling for it left and right and put into a "gotcha" situation.

4. The whole license fee of $10. How can he demand $5,000 in damages when he'll sell the picture for $10?

That is correct. It is far above even the $750 minimum statutory damages assuming he even registers his images.

5. The whole licensing thing is a scam because if you pay the $10, Youngson provides no licensing agreement. When does it start, when does it end? Will he still claim damages from someone who bought a license from him.

I have not heard from anyone paying the $10. Did you pay $10? Is that what you are saying?

6. The people calling you on the phones aren't lawyers. Anyone who ever went to law school would understand their demands aren't reasonable.

Yup, the people on the phones are generally low-level hourly clerks. They do the grunt work.

7. Higbee hasn't sued on this because it would expose the Honeypot scam. There is more money in getting $500 to $1250 settlements from companies who don't know better or don't want to hire an attorney than filing an actual lawsuit.

That is what I have been saying. I rarely call anything a "honeypot" scheme because most victims got their images from Google Images and any number of places.  But with Nick Youngson, he promotes "free" images with crappy disclosures, then nails people for making dumb mistakes on giving credit.

I ignored the calls and I've ignored the threats that they are forwarding this to their litigation team. It's 6 months later. If they wanted to sue me, they would have already.

I agree with you that people should not return calls. In fact, people should save the voice messages. I am interested in hearing more of them. I disagree with you on the rationale of their not filing a lawsuit within 6 months. Many copyright lawsuits are filed between Years 2 & 3 when it becomes clear that months-long efforts to settle have been exhausted. IN particular, Nick Youngson filing a lawsuit is currently unlikely because of the way he operated.  His active promotion of "free" images and lack of clear disclosures is a big problem in my view.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on October 15, 2017, 05:17:50 PM
The timing is important, as it shows you did infringe, since you purchased a license afterwards. The good thing here is that by you purchasing the license afterward, it shows that the image is only worth $10.00 in the eyes of the artist himself.. Any judge that sees this ( which they won't) would probably snicker at Youngson and Higbee, then send a clear message to them to not file these BS lawsuits..
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: icepick on October 15, 2017, 05:20:14 PM
It will be interesting if Higbee really does drop it or if you hear from him down the road. It would kind of set the floor for what it takes to get rid of a Youngson case.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: DavidVGoliath on October 16, 2017, 05:53:27 AM
I actually paid the $10, I feel that if someone is complaining that you violated their copyright, but agree to sell you a license for $10, then they can't claim you owe them $5,000 in damages.

To show the nonsense of Higbee, I did answer the call from one of their "staff". I told them that I bought a license. They checked with Youngson and said that I bought the license for them after their initial claim. They still wanted to negotiate a settlement.

Sorry, Ted: there's case precedent that purchasing a license after you have committed an infringement does not get you off the hook for infringing: Palmer/Kane, LLC v. Rosen Books Works, LLC, Case No. 15-cv-7406 (SD NY Aug. 31, 2016) (viewable at https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9723625002606900591)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: TedStryker on October 22, 2017, 02:21:10 PM
Thanks, but a district court decision where I couldn't reasonably be sued in is of no value to me.

I get your point at the timing of the purchase of the license, but if Youngson is selling a license for $10, what's his reasonable damage especially when I pulled the image after getting the Higbee form letter and images?




I actually paid the $10, I feel that if someone is complaining that you violated their copyright, but agree to sell you a license for $10, then they can't claim you owe them $5,000 in damages.

To show the nonsense of Higbee, I did answer the call from one of their "staff". I told them that I bought a license. They checked with Youngson and said that I bought the license for them after their initial claim. They still wanted to negotiate a settlement.

Sorry, Ted: there's case precedent that purchasing a license after you have committed an infringement does not get you off the hook for infringing: Palmer/Kane, LLC v. Rosen Books Works, LLC, Case No. 15-cv-7406 (SD NY Aug. 31, 2016) (viewable at https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9723625002606900591)
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on October 22, 2017, 03:21:05 PM
Thanks, but a district court decision where I couldn't reasonably be sued in is of no value to me.


If you were sued ( which is unlikely) that case could certainly be quoted by the plaintiff for consideration. IMHO whats more important is the value the artist sets for the image. Provided you did not make huge profits and had little traffic to your site, this would speak volumes to judges.
Title: Re: Higbee & Nick Youngson Extortion Scam
Post by: Zeke on June 02, 2018, 04:47:31 PM
With regards to the image you referenced, it falls under the Creative Commons 3 - CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/). Under this license (Creative Commons offers different types of licenses), you're not simply able to use the image freely under all conditions. Instead you're required to show attribution: "You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use". This is where I think most people are setting themselves up by failing to follow the terms of the license. 

This is one of the images Higbee is trying to extort money from:

http://www.creative-commons-images.com/highway-signs/d/domain-registration.html

It clearly states:  "The picture below related to the word Domain Registration is licensed by R M Media Ltd under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and also permits the image to be modified"

In my opinion, that makes any demand for cash laughable.  Higbee should know these images are being offered for free.  Do they do reverse image searches or look at a client's website?
...

Offering the images for free and them sending Higbee after them?  That is massive extortion and unethical as hell.  Wonder what the bar association would say?

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Ethan Seven on June 02, 2018, 05:21:09 PM
Zeke is correct.  From what I can see, a person can obtain a license for a price or free of charge if they provide a link to one of RM Media’s websites.  I am not an expert on SEO, but I believe links can have considerable promotional value. A person who takes the image and fails to do one of those two options creates a cause of action under 17 US 504. 

There simply is no merit to the idea that a winning class action lawsuit can be created by a class of people who violated a license and then voluntarily settled the claim. 

As far as jurisdiction, if the claim is brought under 17 US 504, a federal court would have subject matter jurisdiction, regardless of where the copyright owner resides.  RM Media has been filing its lawsuits in the state where the defendant resides.

I don’t think there is any harm in writing those letters.  Do it if it is therapeutic, but I don’t think the state bar associations or attorney generals will care about someone making copyright claims that you believe are spurious, especially when you can solve the problem by ignoring them or seeking a judicial remedy if sued.

How is Image Rights associated with this?  I read their website, http:// www.ImageRights.com and do not see a connection.  Are they affiliated with RM Media LTD or Higbee? 
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: tkuhnwald on July 03, 2018, 01:54:51 PM
First, I appreciate a lot this (blog/link/thread?) as I recently received a letter demanding $5280.
My first reaction was panic. OMG. I stole someone’s intellectual property that I thought was free.
As soon as I got the attorney’s letter I removed the image.
I exhaled and started to reflect on the process.
The more I looked the more I realized what a clever swindle it was.
First it was posted under free images at this link. https://www.google.com/search?q=free+images+of+assessment&tbm=isch&source=lnt&tbs=sur:fc&sa=X&ved
Then came the fine print. =0ahUKEwjs14jAuPfbAhVosFQKHTLgAa8QpwUIHw&biw=1794&bih=952&dpr=1#imgrc=hV0PRVgGR5OUjM:
Which leads to the following image
Free Creative Commons
Handwriting Assessment Image
After searching for free images: I find the photo and under the image it says the image may be licensed. So, when I click on the image it takes me to this site:
http://creative-commons-images.com/handwriting/a/assessment.html
Here is the first paragraph on the page:
Free Creative Commons Handwriting Assessment Image
The picture below related to the word Assessment is licensed by R M Media Ltd under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license which permits the free use of the image for any purpose including commercial use and permits the image to be modified. The image may be redistributed for free under the same Creative Commons license but may not be sold, attribution required, see license details below.
Please ensure the license and image size are suitable for your use, alternatively you can purchase the original full-size image on a right managed license for a few dollars from Alpha Stock Images here

When I clicked on Alpha Stock Images and searched for assessment, 4 pages of images show up and the image in question is NOT there and there are no directions to purchase images from there. Nor are there any directions for making an attribution.
After doing what I considered due diligence to find how much it was to pay for the image and could not locate a place to pay or the fee I assumed it was ok to use the image.
Then I received the letter from xxx attorney wanting $5280.
I do have some curiosity how they arrive at their different penalty numbers.
It is a clever bait and switch.
They simply advertise the product under FREE and give no clear directions how to pay for something and no description of what the fee will be or how to make an attribution.
Then they surprise the user with a violation and offer a proposed settlement.
I am sure some people wanting to avoid a legal hassle will opt for a settlement. And they must get enough settlements to continue this kind of swindle.
It is unfortunate the attorney and photographer use their creative talents to prey on legitimate business people instead of harnessing that energy for a productive use. 
So, thank you all for posting your experiences. And I am quite sure this is only the tip of a large parasitic iceberg just lying in wait of another unsuspecting target.

Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: sworx123 on August 30, 2018, 08:40:39 PM
I got one of these letters on a site that barely was live for a few months. What if we just switch domain names. I don't think there was ever a business registered or anything.

You resolve the matter by negotiating a settlement. Otherwise, you have to live with the uncertainty for the next 3 years.

People who settle the matter will generally not say anything publicly. They will also not generally not share what they settle for but I am confident people can settle for much less than the $5K.  However, it is still a lot to settle for most people.

Ultimately, people have to make their own "resolution" if you elect not to negotiate or settle the matter.
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 08, 2018, 05:53:27 PM
Certainly, the timing is questionable but I think the $10 was well spent and a potentially good insurance policy.  I like the idea a lot. Buy the license even if it is after the fact and keep the receipt to show proof of the market value!

The timing is important, as it shows you did infringe, since you purchased a license afterwards. The good thing here is that by you purchasing the license afterward, it shows that the image is only worth $10.00 in the eyes of the artist himself.. Any judge that sees this ( which they won't) would probably snicker at Youngson and Higbee, then send a clear message to them to not file these BS lawsuits..
Title: Re: Beware of Photographer Nicholas (Nick) Youngson of NYPhotographic.com
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 08, 2018, 06:01:52 PM
TedStryker,

I want to say I love your outside of the box thinking. I commend you for it. There is no question about the timing issue of buying after the fact.   But when you spent the $10 and got a receipt from the party who is pursuing you, you now have good evidence that the market value of the image is $10!!! The market price was set by the accuser himself!!!

The best part is that you should be able to continue to use the image!  There is no wilful infringement if you went out of your way to buy/license the image to continue to use it.

I speak as a non-lawyer that spending the $10 is a good investment and a good tool in case there is any litigation or legal argument.

In fact, you could take it a step further and buy/license the same image twice (two $10 licenses) and keep the receipt.

Youngson images have a ridiculously low market value and there is little risk for any letter recipient to just go buy/license the damned image and get the receipt for it to help mitigate the infringement claim.

I get your point at the timing of the purchase of the license, but if Youngson is selling a license for $10, what's his reasonable damage especially when I pulled the image after getting the Higbee form letter and images?