ExtortionLetterInfo Forums

ELI Forums => Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum => Topic started by: RR on September 26, 2018, 04:01:04 PM

Title: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 26, 2018, 04:01:04 PM
So my case is a little different.

I started getting from AFP and now Higbee claims on a picture that was inside a PDF that was on the site.
They have no screenshots of the picture ever been on the website since it was never was. It was only inside a document linked from the website.

The PDF presentation file mentioned in the claim was linked from the website.
If you go to the claim they have link to a PDF that has the image but is not related to the website. This PDF was removed from the website a long time ago and is no shared.

Also might worth to note the company that built the website and the main company (we are a US sister company with the same name) is from outside the US.

Another thing i forgot is to mention they say it's a "commercial use in a pdf/presentation" and asking for $3200
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 26, 2018, 06:07:30 PM
These types of "so-called" PDF infringements make me nutty.  PDF's are not inherently visible at all. You generally have to download and open them with a PDF viewer.

I think it is ridiculous and the amount being asked for is outrageous. That means, YOU have to be willing to fight and push back on the matter.  Some will say an infringement is an infringement (meaning all infringements are treated equally). To that, I say it is bullshit.

If it was all equal, there would not be such a variation of settlements and outcomes.

If you have a PDF "infringement", as far as I am concerned, this is is very far down on the priority list. This is NOT a legal argument.  It is a "common sense" argument where someone would have to force me, torture me, or drag it out of my dead body for me to ever accept it.

We have some legal minds here so maybe they might have something to add here. In my view, sometimes a strong "common sense" argument and strong pushback is what is needed.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 26, 2018, 07:19:34 PM
Hi Matthew,

Thank you for detailed answer, i appreciate the time and would love to hear others as well.

I agree and i feel the same the fact the screenshots don't actually show anything other than a page with a link made me the major "punch" of the case is missing although they have the presentation that showing the image.
The image was used is of a man jumping a fence, nothing that was done intentionally and definitely does not benefit us commercially.

If they asked for $500 i would let it go but at over $3000 i think it's outrageous for something that does not even show on our website.
What do you suggest by fighting back? i don't might the back and forward but spending on a lawyer more than the cost of the claim would be missing the point.



Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 26, 2018, 10:24:27 PM
I can't teach the art of negotiation and and how to argue your case here. There are strategies, tactics, etc. but it doesn't fit into any neat recipe that people desperately want.

I have been threatening to do this for years and continue to threaten to do it.  I want to write a book that teaches the stuff I know so people can better prepare themselves in these situations. I am going to try to tackle it within the next 6 months or so.  It is one that synthesizes knowledge and wisdom from many fields of expertise.  As such, I can't easily give an answer for everyone.

People who have never dealt with adversarial business conflicts have a much larger learning curve.  And contrary to popular belief, you don't always have to be a lawyer to get your points cross.  It is how your posture, present, and tell your story. It also is based in your level of personal convictions, risk-taking, and coping with stress and uncertainty.

People wrongfully assume that all lawyers know how to argue and negotiate. I learned the hard way in years past, that is absolutely not true. There are some lawyers that are very smart but I would NEVER have them do certain things for me even if it was free.

For example, there is a big difference between an artist who knows how to produce a detailed drawing of a hammer and a carpenter that knows how to swing a hammer and hit the nail on the head to drive it into the wood.

I am a guy who have, over time, learned how to use various hammers to hit different nails in many ways for the outcome I want.

There are nuggets of strategies of what I am talking about scattered throughout these forums in addition to other people's perspectives. Start reading and absorbing.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Ethan Seven on September 27, 2018, 12:39:44 AM
I do not see anything inherently different about the merits of a claim just because the infringement was on a pdf.   Like all copyright claims, they are fact specific.   I would need to know much more before I called it nutty just because the infringement was on a pdf.   

Many PDF files I see online are copies of materials that are primarily used in other manners.  For instance, I often download pdf files that are product manuals or portions of magazines.  In some instances a pdf online is just a sign of a much larger possible infringement. 

So, I would not make categorical assumptions based on the file format in which the infringement occurred. 

In analyzing this, something has occurred to me that should have long ago.  From what I understand, many of the demand letters are being sent are for a complete release of liability for the infringement.  If that is the case, it makes some sense why the demand amounts might seem high.  The copyright holder is operating with limited information about the full extent of the use. 

Couple that with the fact that most businesses create websites that try to portray the business as big or successful, and it gets a little easier to understand where some of the demand amounts are coming from. 

Believe me, I am sure greed, frustration and other emotions are also factors in many demand amounts, as well as the age old belief that negotiations need to start high and work down.    I just think I have previously failed to consider the information gap and the relief being offered as possible factors.


Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 27, 2018, 08:01:55 AM
The picture was used only in a single PDF to portray a scenario we solve, that's all.
It was not intentional infringement try to paint us as something we're not using someone else picture or using it to any benefit.

It matters that it's not in the website and in a pdf because it was not "stolen" to be used in a public platform where we use it to our benefit in my mind.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on September 27, 2018, 03:08:53 PM
I say what I say about PDFs from a technical standpoint, not necessarily a legal standpoint.

PDFs don't inherently display "naturally" on a web browser. Even if the image was the only element being stored in a PDF, it requires a user to actively click a PDF to view it. The device must also have the necessary software already installed to view it. Not all devices inherently have PDF viewing capabilities.

I run into PDFs occasionally and when I do encounter them, they don't "just display" as casually as if it were a web page. 

Having said that, I agree that determining the facts of the usage does have bearing. But images in a PDF just ain't the same as images on a web page as a practical matter.

I do not see anything inherently different about the merits of a claim just because the infringement was on a pdf.   Like all copyright claims, they are fact specific.   I would need to know much more before I called it nutty just because the infringement was on a pdf.   

So, I would not make categorical assumptions based on the file format in which the infringement occurred. 
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on September 27, 2018, 03:25:02 PM
The picture was used only in a single PDF to portray a scenario we solve, that's all.

So it was used to illustrate your company's services - to your own staff as training materials, or to potential clients as solicitation of their business?

It matters that it's not in the website and in a pdf because it was not "stolen" to be used in a public platform where we use it to our benefit in my mind.

The "benefit" is that you didn't seek permission and/or pay for the use of the photograph and, now that fact has been discovered, you're on the receiving end of a copyright infringement claim.

I occasionally work with corporate clients and, depending on their brief, the images they want may be for internal use only, for client-facing use, or a combination. My licensing fee reflects the expected scope of use and yes, sometimes this will include electronic copies of documents in PDF format.

To claim that the photographer and their attorney have no grounds for a claim because it was a PDF and not a website usage is, frankly, ludicrous.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 27, 2018, 03:33:06 PM
No one said they had no grounds, this i was done in an innocent way.
First of all to ask for $3000 is outrageous, if they were asking for $300 i would think there's something to talk about but asking for this amount like we used it knowingly while stealing someone else work is just not true.
Those blood sucking lawyer treat this matter like this was some kind of armed robbery while this was an innocent mistake of someone who does not understand that taking a picture from the internet isn't really free and coming without warning to claim i owe them money.

What is $3000 is based on? why it's not 2300 or 5000 or 350? is this pure speculation.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on September 27, 2018, 05:21:48 PM
No one said they had no grounds, this i was done in an innocent way.

Infringement of copyrights is what is called a strict liability tort; in plainer language, that means that when you infringe, the why/how doesn't really come into play. In some ways, it's similar to getting a speeding ticket and trying to argue you know of or see the speed limit signs. If you want to argue about circumstances, then that's done to either a judge, jury or court-mandated arbitration. You can try to argue your case during pre-trial settlement negotiations, but the attorney/photographer may not believe you.

First of all to ask for $3000 is outrageous, if they were asking for $300 i would think there's something to talk about but asking for this amount like we used it knowingly while stealing someone else work is just not true.

I license photographs to corporate clients for three, four, and five-figure sums. If the photographer has a sales history of doing the same, then maybe $3,000 isn't a stretch in terms of their lost revenues. Consider: if you'd asked this specific photographer to use the specific image before you published it, you would have had the opportunity to do one of three things

1: Pay their requested fee

2. Attempt to negotiate a lower fee

3. Walk away and choose a different photographer's work at a price suitable to your budget

By simply finding, taking, and then publishing their photograph, there was an end-run where none of the above happened.

Those blood sucking lawyer treat this matter like this was some kind of armed robbery while this was an innocent mistake of someone who does not understand that taking a picture from the internet isn't really free and coming without warning to claim i owe them money.

It's almost twenty years since Napster came on the scene and disrupted the music industry, with the term "copyright infringement" entering the consciousness of the public at large. Maybe you really didn't know that taking a random picture from the internet then publishing it in a business-related capacity wasn't legal but, in my opinion, that argument holds less water with each passing year since 1999.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 27, 2018, 05:45:04 PM
Since you are the guy that making money out of stuff like that i don't expect you to agree with me.

You are missing the point, the have only a presentation with the photo. No proof it was on the website only showing a link.
All i'm saying this is a presentation that was not shared in public and i'm willing to pay a small fine of few hundreds dollars for the use but not 3000.

Also a judge won't award them that money so fast either but i just don't want to drag this too much.

The main question is should i contact them and negotiate, someone from higbee called once left no name and said they will call again which they never did.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on September 27, 2018, 06:08:19 PM
The main question is should i contact them and negotiate, someone from higbee called once left no name and said they will call again which they never did.

The $64 question that only you can answer. All business requires management of risk and uncertainty. Whether you negotiate (risk management) or wait to see if you're taken to court (uncertainty) is your decision alone.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on September 27, 2018, 06:40:08 PM
Generally speaking we here advise to not contact anybody directly, as you can easily state something that could come back and bite you, however, since you pretty much admitted to using the image without a license, it probably doesn't matter at this point..( since we all know for a fact that Higbee and others frequent these forums)..i doubt contacting them will yield the desired results, at the end of the day, the artist wants to be paid and higbee wants to be paid..
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Ethan Seven on September 28, 2018, 01:05:02 AM
@DavidvGoliath. I know you claim to be a photographer, but you think and write very lawyerly.  My guess is that you had a solid classical education or your parents were lawyers.  No need to divulge, I enjoy a mystery.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on September 28, 2018, 10:39:57 AM
Generally speaking we here advise to not contact anybody directly, as you can easily state something that could come back and bite you, however, since you pretty much admitted to using the image without a license, it probably doesn't matter at this point..( since we all know for a fact that Higbee and others frequent these forums)..i doubt contacting them will yield the desired results, at the end of the day, the artist wants to be paid and higbee wants to be paid..

I didn't admit to do anything since it's not me that created the file.
As everyone in this forum if they get contacted with an email or letter they have a screenshot of the violation. No one used this image knowingly without a license and who ever created the file found it on google images and not in a certain place, at the time of the creation google did not still note anything about copyrights.

I definitely think i have an argument here.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on September 28, 2018, 01:29:09 PM
... who ever created the file found it on google images

The lesson of the day? A Google image search is not a free-for-all image library.

I definitely think i have an argument here.

Then consult a lawyer who has specialist knowledge of copyright law, and give them all the facts of how the PDF came to be made etc. - they'll then let you know how much weight your argument may bear.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on October 01, 2018, 04:37:49 PM
David,
First of all you are not helping, i did not write this post to get "lesson of the day" from you.

I'm posting here to ask to assistance with lawyers that are trying to squeeze money from me in dishonest ways.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on October 01, 2018, 05:39:04 PM
The case is i found it on the internet without any mentioning of copy rights, i had no way to know it's owned by someone.
This use had no bad intention any Getty image has a watermark, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/parents-swinging-their-daughter-in-garden-high-res-stock-photography/498626487
The one i'm accused of did not have anything and no right claim, i do not know where google took the photo from but i can't know either.

Also a fair cost of a getty image is 500-600 dollars where is over 3000 is coming from?!
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on October 01, 2018, 06:55:41 PM
It’s two times in two years and I used Google Images to get any images that are allowed without permission and we all know how the Youngson honeypot operation goes.

For the love of all that is holy, Google Images is not a stock photo library so, unless you want to run the risk of being sued, don't use it for that purpose.

All that Google Images does is create an index of content that exists on web servers and, when you key a query like "white crested duck", their proprietary algorithms will show you a selection of images that (partly or completely) matches your search terms.

What it can't do with 100% certainty is inform you whether any image you click on is subject to copyright, available under a Creative Commons (or similar) license, or if the copyright has expired (public domain). All it can do is point you to the website where it found and indexed that particular image and, even then, there may not be any further useful information with the degree of unambiguity that you may need to avoid the risk of infringing.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on October 02, 2018, 09:47:14 AM
The problem you expect the normal person to know and understand it and before they had the notice for copy rights it was not clear or understandable for people who don't understand computers or how it works.
There's a reason why it happens so many times.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on October 02, 2018, 11:39:07 AM
The problem you expect the normal person to know and understand it and before they had the notice for copy rights it was not clear or understandable for people who don't understand computers or how it works.
There's a reason why it happens so many times.

which is exactly why EVERY image indexed by google includes "Images may be subject to copyright. Learn More" with the learn more leading to https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjp_cy6iujdAhVKIKwKHfs8CbkQlZ0DegQIARAB
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on October 02, 2018, 11:45:10 AM
Google have been displaying notifications that "Images May be Subject to Copyright" alongside their image search results for at least six years - a few months after they made their reverse-search algorithm publicly usable.

http://www.mediacrazed.com/google-images-for-your-website
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: RR on October 02, 2018, 11:59:50 AM
If this was and case... and it's not there would have no reason for this:
GETTY AND GOOGLE REACH SETTLEMENT—SAY GOODBYE TO ‘VIEW IMAGE’ BUTTON
http://resourcemagonline.com/2018/02/getty-and-google-reach-settlement-say-goodbye-to-view-image-button/85921/

Quote
Labelling – Google agreed to “mak[e] the copyright disclaimer more prominent” on image results. While this doesn’t stop would-be pilferers from scraping images, it does notify well-meaning individual unaware of copyright law.

It think the self righteous attitude doesn't help people who are dealing with those lawyers.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Ethan Seven on October 02, 2018, 12:33:11 PM

which is exactly why EVERY image indexed by google includes "Images may be subject to copyright. Learn More" with the learn more leading to https://support.google.com/legal/answer/3463239?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjp_cy6iujdAhVKIKwKHfs8CbkQlZ0DegQIARAB

Agreed. 

From my understanding the copyright notice has always been there.   Furthermore, I think the reasonable American adult, especially one who is engaged in business, should have enough commonsense to know (1) Google is not a free library of images and (2) that you cannot just take and use what you do not own.

Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on October 02, 2018, 03:43:47 PM
I would agree with your statement.  Most people don't really learn about the ins and outs of this stuff until they get their first demand letter.

However, there are a fair amount of people who "sort of know and should know" but don't really pay heed until they get hit directly.  There are people on different parts of the infringement spectrum.

The problem you expect the normal person to know and understand it and before they had the notice for copy rights it was not clear or understandable for people who don't understand computers or how it works.
There's a reason why it happens so many times.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on October 02, 2018, 03:59:34 PM
Regarding "American adults engaged in business"....

I am sad to tell you I know many people who have been in business for years and STILL know so little about how the online world works. Using the default search is a feat much less choosing a search engine. Many still don't know they can actually choose a search engine, period.

The lack of basic computer proficiency clicking around Windows, copying and pasting files, saving files, using Word, Excel, etc. and basic typing skills is sadly still alive and well today.

Given this very low baseline that still exists to this day, it is not a far stretch that the issue of IP and copyright is extremely far away with many people.

You also have business people who naively hire overseas freelancers expecting ethical behavior but it turns out they pirate many elements of their work.

Let's remember, there are still huge swaths of people whose only Internet access is their phone.  Some very small timers operate that way. Lots of "street entrepreneurs" out there who dabble online. When they eventually "graduate" to a computer, it is not surprising that there will be new people who fall into the trap.

And for the record, I find interacting with someone with such a low base of computer knowledge very painful to witness.   And even people who are "intelligent", it is shocking the level of ignorance that continue to exist.

From my understanding the copyright notice has always been there.   Furthermore, I think the reasonable American adult, especially one who is engaged in business, should have enough commonsense to know (1) Google is not a free library of images and (2) that you cannot just take and use what you do not own.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Ethan Seven on October 03, 2018, 01:24:13 AM
You are probably right.  I am sure there are some unsophisticated people running unsophisticated businesses that get themselves in trouble. 

It just seems to me that the overwhelming people who are smart enough to do everything else it takes to start a business and deploy a website should be smart enough to know Google is not a source of free images.   
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: clist on October 03, 2018, 02:56:11 AM
You are probably right.  I am sure there are some unsophisticated people running unsophisticated businesses that get themselves in trouble. 

It just seems to me that the overwhelming people who are smart enough to do everything else it takes to start a business and deploy a website should be smart enough to know Google is not a source of free images.

  ???
Condescend much?

Gheesh.

The truth of the matter is that [insert adjective here] people can launch a website / web based business with close to nothing [for next to nothing] and most likely use images found on the web because they just don't know any better.  Plain and simple.

They probably assume that (1) images that shouldn't be used without consent will have some kind of a disclaimer (eg: an easy to read watermark ~ not some fine print bulls*it) and/or (2) they'll receive some sort of C&D warning about an "illegal usage" before they get an demand letter. 

And lets face it, we live in a time where "sharing" is encouraged [eg: creative commons, facebook sharing, IG reposts, etc.] so its easy for ANYBODY to come to that conclusion.

Unfortunately opportunistic lawyers and copyright trolls with shady business models are having a field day playing the "gotcha" game in which they take antiquated laws from yesterday and hang the people of today out to dry with them..

It really is a sad state of affairs.

 >:(

/rant

Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Ethan Seven on October 03, 2018, 02:27:25 PM
I believe saying people are smart enough to know something is the opposite of condescending.

You are probably right that I underestimate the impact that social media has on some people’s mindset when they infringe.  nevertheless, I still suspect that is a very small percentage who do not know the difference between sharing photos on social media and deploying them on a commercial website.

I believe that the overwhelming number of people who infringe do it based on assumptions that include, it feels like a victimless crime, it is easy to do, the chances of getting caught are small, they think if they get caught they will just get a warning, there are no major consequences if they do get caught, it is cheaper to infringe and deal with the rare consequences that it is to buy and track licenses.    Many of those assumptions are probably true, but none are based on ignorance that it is a violation of copyright.

Regardless of their mental state, I am glad to offer my commentary. 
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: clist on October 03, 2018, 03:41:01 PM
I believe saying people are smart enough to know something is the opposite of condescending.

You are probably right that I underestimate the impact that social media has on some people’s mindset when they infringe.  nevertheless, I still suspect that is a very small percentage who do not know the difference between sharing photos on social media and deploying them on a commercial website.

I believe that the overwhelming number of people who infringe do it based on assumptions that include, it feels like a victimless crime, it is easy to do, the chances of getting caught are small, they think if they get caught they will just get a warning, there are no major consequences if they do get caught, it is cheaper to infringe and deal with the rare consequences that it is to buy and track licenses.    Many of those assumptions are probably true, but none are based on ignorance that it is a violation of copyright.

Regardless of their mental state, I am glad to offer my commentary.

You're right, your assumptions imply that most scenarios involve people who know what they are doing is wrong..

That said, I truly believe that most people are unaware that they are even committing a crime.

Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: kingkendall on October 04, 2018, 01:13:24 PM
Technically billions of people are guilty are infringement when a copyrighted image is shared on social media.  That's the problem with an antiquated law in the internet age.  Is there an incentive to update the law? 

I don't see none?  The copyright troll makes money by sending demand letters for outrageous sums to snatch up the low hanging fruit.  The court makes $400 dollars a pop for suits that are actually filed.  Lawyers for plaintiff and defendants make money for stretching out a mickey mouse claim that that eventually will end in a settlement one way or another.  So where is the incentive to fix it all? 

Meanwhile the little guy is getting hurt in a system that set up to screw him coughed in the language of legality.  He's the one that's called a thief by a bigger thief who has the nerve to act like he has the moral high ground when he's committing extortion?   

       
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: DavidVGoliath on October 04, 2018, 05:01:38 PM
Technically billions of people are guilty are infringement when a copyrighted image is shared on social media.

Nope. If the photograph is shared using the built-in tools of a service like Twitter or Facebook, then as long as the image in question is either the uploader's own work - of they have permission from teh creator to upload it to social media - then there's no infringement.

[quote author=kingkendall link=topic=5336.msg23282#msg23282 date=1538673204The copyright troll makes money by sending demand letters for outrageous sums to snatch up the low hanging fruit.  The court makes $400 dollars a pop for suits that are actually filed.  Lawyers for plaintiff and defendants make money for stretching out a mickey mouse claim that that eventually will end in a settlement one way or another.  So where is the incentive to fix it all?[/quote] 

Look at what has been going on in the EU, where I live: new laws were voted on last month which mandate that information services themselves would need to pay a portion of their revenues to rightsholders so that copyright content can be shared on their networks. The how of this system will be meted out over the next two years, but the intended end result is that social media users - in Europe at least - should be able to post most rightsholder content without repercussions to themselves, because the services will foot the bill.

If you're at all familiar with the concept of music recording mechanical royalties vis-a-vis radio stations then you'll have a grasp on the intent, since both the above, and my foregoing statement, are an oversimplification of the framework for the sake of brevity.

You can bet the farm that other nations are closely following the new EU legislation as a possible framework for updating their own copyright laws.

Meanwhile the little guy is getting hurt in a system that set up to screw him coughed in the language of legality.  He's the one that's called a thief by a bigger thief who has the nerve to act like he has the moral high ground when he's committing extortion?

Again, nope: making use of someone else's property, without their consent, is the issue. Legislation sets out possible avenues of restitution and, to avoid burdening the courts with every single claim, they encourage parties to attempt to resolve their differences before taking the more formal and serious step of petitioning the courts.

If you want to call that extortion, then your argument is based on semantics and personal opinion instead of definitions under law.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: UnfairlyTargeted on October 05, 2018, 01:11:02 PM
Quote
Meanwhile the little guy is getting hurt in a system that set up to screw him coughed in the language of legality.  He's the one that's called a thief by a bigger thief who has the nerve to act like he has the moral high ground when he's committing extortion?

Amen to that.  You guys seriously need to get with the real world and stop living in the fantasy world of antique law and overinflated picture values from 40 years ago.  Reforming the laws can't come soon enough.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: Matthew Chan on October 11, 2018, 04:09:14 AM
"Crime" is a strong word that I would not use unless it is used in a hyperbolic sense. No one is being prosecuted by any government entity.  Most of the small time infringements we discuss here can never be escalated to any truly criminal matter.  A speeding ticket is more of a "crime" than the infringements we discuss because the police get involved in speeding tickets. If you don't pay it, the city, county, or state doesn't like it very much for ignoring the ticket.

That said, I truly believe that most people are unaware that they are even committing a crime.
Title: Re: Higbee, PicRights and AFP for photo inside a PDF
Post by: clist on October 11, 2018, 06:47:07 PM
You're right.

;)

Go on and replace "committing a crime" with "doing something wrong".