ExtortionLetterInfo Forums

ELI Forums => Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum => Topic started by: nycopyrightabuse on February 17, 2017, 11:50:34 AM

Title: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 17, 2017, 11:50:34 AM
Hello, I represent a U.S. company (name redacted as the complaint is proceeding) that received a settlement demand letter from Higbee & Associates (represented by Matthew Higbee) on behalf of Nicholas Youngson - the photographer and owner of http://nyphotographic.com (http://nyphotographic.com).

The reason I am posting is because we believe that Mr. Youngson is engaging in copyright abuse by engaging in deceptive and misleading business practices. That is, he is freely distributing his images and encouraging others to use them only to later issue settlement demand letters over copyright infringement.

I am going to explain the situation and ask the community for help in order to substantiate the claim that Mr. Youngson's business practices are a pattern of behavior (impacting many people) and he is well aware of the nuances of his actions.

The initial complaint by Youngson/Higbee
Higbee's initial complaint to us alleges that we used images on our website that violate his copyright. For brevity, I am only going to include evidence related to one image.

Full complaint link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SVTBtak9JdzBsRzA/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SVTBtak9JdzBsRzA/view?usp=sharing)

Here is a summary of the complaint:
Now, here is a link to the image in question -
"Obamacare Scrabble": https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SeWhwMXVjeTRta1E/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SeWhwMXVjeTRta1E/view?usp=sharing)

Investigation and findings
We spent weeks investigating the matter and found some strange oddities with regards to how Mr. Youngson operates his photography business.

First, he distributes his images for a fee on his primary website, http://nyphotographic.com (http://nyphotographic.com).

However, he also owns and operates a number of other image websites (the Mirrors), as many people in this community know:
On his Mirror website, we obtained the same image from this URL: http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/wooden-tile/o/obamacare.html (http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/wooden-tile/o/obamacare.html)

Note that at the top of the image, there is the following language:
Quote
The image below related to the word Obamacare 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, 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 rights managed license for a few dollars from NYPhotographic.com here

There is attribution language at the bottom of the image:
Quote
Free License permits: Sharing, copying and redistributing in any medium or format including adapting, remixing, transforming, and building upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. Attribution required.

Additionally, Mr. Youngson has images from his Mirror websites indexed by Google images and listed as "Free for commercial use with modification."

See the Google search result: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SMFVDejk5ZzNnTDA/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SMFVDejk5ZzNnTDA/view?usp=sharing)

But he does not allow his images to be indexed under the same licensing rights for his primary domain where he sells images.

Summary
In short, Mr. Youngson encourages others to take and use his images on Mirror websites, but sells them on his main website.

Interpretation
By distributing his images on the Mirror websites and presenting sparse and vague licensing information up front, there is a high possibility of confusion. It is this confusion that prompts any logical reader to ask the following questions:
Indeed, a reply from Mr. Higbee's office yielded the following response:
Quote
Each one of those domains mentioned is owned and managed by our client, Nick Youngson. He uses them as a platform to showcase his work. As I am sure you are aware, each image is available through a creative commons license. The terms of the Creative Commons 3.0 license can be found on the URLS that your [sic] provided. It also states that the top of the web page that attribution is required [sic].

Mr. Youngson is well-aware that his licensing/distribution causes confusion when reasonable parties look for images on the web and his counsel has not addressed the confusion in any capacity.

Abuse of copyright
In knowing that his distribution is the root-cause of the problem, Mr. Youngson has done nothing to amend his business practices. Instead, he has teamed up with a law firm (Higbee & Associates) to track down individuals who fall prey to this sort of "entrapment." Had his licensing terms and attribution stipulations been more prominently listed on his Mirror websites, I highly doubt many reasonable parties would use his images.

By allowing others to use and download his images under these circumstances, I believe that Mr. Youngson may be violating the U.S. Copyright laws by engaging in deceptive and misleading practices in an effort to gain settlement compensation.

We're asking for the community's help
We would like to conclude our business with Mr. Youngson and also ensure that others don't fall victim to the same deceitful enterprise. To do that, we must clearly establish a pattern of behavior by Mr. Youngson in the following areas:
This is the part where we need the community's help: if you have been impacted by a similar scenario involving Mr. Youngson's Mirror websites (listed above), please fill out the form linked below.

https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1 (https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1)

Only include information you feel comfortable sharing. The replies will not be shared with the public (or anyone else) by myself or the company. If you do share your name, email and an incident summary, it will greatly increase the likelihood that Mr. Youngson will be prompted to amend his business practices and provide clear language on his Mirror websites. We only intend to share the total number of legitimate replies we receive with Mr. Higbee's firm.

Thank you all very much in advance. I hope that our effort in this endeavor will minimize the instance of settlement demand letters for ourselves and others.

You can also share any private emails with me using this dedicated email address: nyoungsoncopyrightabuse@gmail.com
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 19, 2017, 03:39:52 AM
Update
Thank you all so much for the positive Google form response rate. We have received numerous replies (mostly from attorneys in the same situation as us) indicating that we are not the only ones going through the same nuisance. Our next reply to Higbee & Company will include total response data (no personal information included, as promised) in order to show that their enterprise of demand letter extortion is not acceptable and a pattern of misconduct.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Defender on February 20, 2017, 12:24:05 PM
Thanks for posting this.  Please keep us updated as to the status of your situation.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: ih8trolls on February 22, 2017, 02:09:25 PM
Yes, please keep use posted on any progress. Higbee seems to be taking more of an aggressive approach at least in my situation.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on February 23, 2017, 08:23:36 PM
I am going to chime in here as I feel a bit uncomfortable with some aspects of the post by nycopyrightabuse.

I am uncomfortable with the solicitation of information from the ELI Community without any disclosure who you are. If you are a lawyer, you should be disclosing your identity.

And if you are NOT a lawyer, you have asked people to entrust their private information to someone who has no standing or credibility. You are simply an anonymous account at this point. You purport to be a victim and you might well be but I am wary of anyone trying to obtain other people's information when you are yourself posting anonymously.

I have sent a private email to the email address listed regarding this matter.

For people reading, I understand the desire to share information and to assist one another. However, how does anyone know that it isn't Higbee, Nick Youngson, or someone related to them trying to collect information from anonymous readers here?

I will not allow an information honeypot to exist here. I don't believe that is the case here but the potential for foul play exists.

For that reason, I exercise LOTS OF CAUTION before giving any information to an unknown party of has NOT identified themselves, not matter how good their intentions might be.

Until I get clarification directly from the author, I am redacting the email address in the interest of community security.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 23, 2017, 09:57:51 PM
Matthew Chan, thanks for taking the time to reply to my thread. Truthfully, I debated for a few days whether or not to reach out to you privately before writing my initial post. I should have trusted my gut instinct and done it.

I am not a lawyer and only represent a U.S. based company. The company decided to conceal the identity because our situation is ongoing and we didn't feel comfortable fully disclosing company matters that may turn into litigation. I also completely understand and agree with the merits of your post.

We are asking for the ELI community's help and agree that there isn't much information from us except for the linked documents we provided. You are right that this does present inherent risk for anyone who contacts us. To our credit, we stated multiple times that any information provided would not be used or published - and we encouraged others to redact information they didn't feel comfortable sharing.

With that being said, I want to express an apology if my initial post seemed like it was an "information honeypot." It was not my intent and I understand your concern. I will be replying to your personal email shortly to address the matter privately - something I should have done at the start.

Thanks you.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 23, 2017, 10:33:13 PM
Matthew, I replied to your email (as promised) and look forward to providing details and information in order to verify my positive intentions and objectives with the community. I appreciate your adherence to the community's best interests with regards to safety and also look forward to getting the email address reinstated on my original post.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on February 23, 2017, 11:13:42 PM
NYCopyrightrightabuse,

I have received your email and will respond personally there. Once we hammer out the details and issues, I think we should be fine.

IN a general sense, I do like that you are being proactive, strongly voiced your position/opinions, and taken the initiative to do something. I am not giving an endorsement of what you are doing or your arguments but I do respect that you are not sitting back and letting yourself or your client become blindly victimized.

I will offer this nugget to anyone regarding receiving the Higbee letters regarding Youngson's photos. There is a tremendously disproportionate number of Higbee letters and Nick Youngson letters showing up. There is something not right about this.

At least Getty Images, Masterfile, and other stock photo agencies have an "excuse" to send out large numbers of letters. Because they have such a huge library of images from which people can infringe upon.

But the Youngson image issue appears to be VASTLY because of "gotcha infringements".  The majority of victims are making an attempt to find appropriate Creative Commons images to use but getting tripped up on the attribution issue.  And because of that, people are getting bullshit $5,000 "speeding tickets" for goofing up the attribution issue with little or no advance warning.

So whether it is intentional or unintentional, there is a honeypot situation that exists as far as I am concerned.  And it appears to me that these $5,000 demands are taking UNFAIR advantage of that situation. And that is what is creating the outrage right now. The Higbee operation is being followed and reported very closely.

It seems in the near future, there might be a dedicated Higbee Letter Forum due to the significant numbers of people I am hearing from. 

Essentially, the best thing for Youngson image victims to do is spread the word on this trap.

Regarding the anonymity issue, I have no problems with people posting anonymously as long as they do so in a responsible way. Some people and websites abuse the anonymous posting privilege which is why I am vigilant and watchful on the matter.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 24, 2017, 01:04:51 AM
Matthew Chan, thank you very much for the speedy reply and note about us being proactive. I look forward to hammering all of the details out in a swift fashion and to your satisfaction. I agree with the entirety of your post and think that the Higbee letters do deserve their own forum.

Indeed, the Higbee/Youngson complaints are a different animal because the enterprise was designed to trap innocent people into using images they thought were free for use. Nicholas Youngson is not in the photography business -- he's in the settlement collections business, and he has partnered with Higbee and Associates to handle the paperwork.

I was going to wait for our next reply from Higbee before making an update, but think now is a good time to disclose some new information our research team discovered in the last week. The items listed below have serious implications for many Higbee demand letter victims and give insight into how the ELI community is making a serious impact on their nefarious operations.

Update 1. A closer look at Youngson's copyright registrations
TL;DR - summary Youngson may have lied on his copyright registration application by saying that all of his many images in one "collection" were unpublished. Finding one image in his collection before the date of June 10, 2016 may invalidate his entire copyright to the collection.

Long answer. In our recent correspondence with Higbee's office, we asked for the full copyright registration of the images in question - including the certificate AND visual assets. Jeremy C. refused to provide this and replied with the following:

Quote
Hello, What you are requesting is a deposit copy. Please contact the US Copyright Office with your request. They will provide what you are seeking in the form of a CD. There is a fee and a lengthy turn around [sic]time. Please be advised that per 17 USC §410(c), providing the registration constitutes prima facie evidence and we will not need a deposit copy should our client wish to proceed with litigation.

This response is designed to add more duress (stress) to the situation and pressure the victim to submit to the nuisance settlement demand.

However, the problem is that we didn't dispute the validity of their copyright registration. We wanted evidence that the disputed images actually belong to the certificate they provided. This is an important concern: the copyright registration certificates they submit with their demand letters include many images under a generic title.

Consider the fact that for three distinct (and visually contrasting) images we were accused of infringing, there is one registration certificate with the following unique identification information:

Link to copyright registration certificate: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SX3FLTDJXNTd6Vjg/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SX3FLTDJXNTd6Vjg/view?usp=sharing)

Note a few things:

Given that Mr. Youngson has been selling his images for many years, it's hard to believe that he would create hundreds (maybe thousands) of images as part of a collection and wait until they were all done and copyrighted to publish them online (in June of 2016). It makes sense why he would do it as a collection - to save money on copyright registration fees.

The opportunity - to invalidate Youngson's entire copyright collection
The Copyright law statute is clear in asserting that if you lie or misrepresent facts on your application that (1) you face a financial penalty up to $2,500.00 and; (2) your copyright registration is invalid.

So, if any one of the images in the entire collection was published online (available to the public in any way), it is possible that Youngson's entire copyright collection may be invalid (because he lied on his copyright application). Maybe someone from the community can find it?

Our internal research efforts
We have tried to locate the images, but it's difficult because Youngson is refusing to provide the original registration documents. We are currently waiting for their reply to our request and may have to request it from the copyright office ourselves (at a high fee).

We tried to ping earlier versions of Youngson's Origin and Mirror websites using Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://nyphotographic.com/ (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://nyphotographic.com/)

However, he has settings that disable indexing. See screenshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SWUdNNklEakNNREU/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SWUdNNklEakNNREU/view?usp=sharing)

They have also refused to answer why they don't want to provide full copyright registration. After all, a court would force them to in the case of litigation.

Update 2. A new Youngson website to combat ELI's search engine presence
Since we started this thread the Youngson/Higbee camp has responded in a clever way. They noticed that when you Google terms like "Nicholas Youngson" the main results are for the ELI forum threads:

Google search results for term "Nicholas Youngson": https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SWW9uWlVleGpSM0E/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SWW9uWlVleGpSM0E/view?usp=sharing)

This is bad for their settlement collections business as it means fewer people will take their demand letters seriously. Plus, Nicholas is earning a solid reputation of being a copyright troll. Just imagine Youngson's plight if you were in his shoes: when people Google your name, they see search results for "extortion letter info" and negative comments about your character/business practices.

Well, Youngson has made a move. He recently registered the domain name http://www.nick-youngson-photography.com (http://www.nick-youngson-photography.com) on February 19, 2017.

See the who.is registration screenshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7STDQ0YWd0RGpVUUU/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7STDQ0YWd0RGpVUUU/view?usp=sharing)
See the who.is registration page: https://who.is/whois/nick-youngson-photography.com (https://who.is/whois/nick-youngson-photography.com)

The timing is an unusual coincidence: just two days after we posted our initial thread.

Interpretation
Youngson registered this domain name to combat the negative search results about him and his business. My company is thoroughly trained in search engine optimization (SEO) techniques and knows how it works: to get high rankings for certain terms you should provide content relevant to the topic and use keywords associated with it. Well, Youngson's new website is a blog (no images for sale as of February 23, 2017) focusing on posts related to the following keywords: copyright, images, Nicholas Youngson, Creative Commons License...etc.

The intent is clear: he is trying to control search engine results with his name to reduce visibility of good information related to ELI and his business practices. Luckily, the ELI forums are a relevant and trusted source of information about his operations - more relevant than his own websites according to Google's intelligent search ranking algorithms.

Call to action for the ELI community: Reading the posts on this forum are not enough; consider registering an account and post your input on these matters in the appropriate thread (while following the forum guidelines set forth by Matthew Chan of course) to ensure that these tangible sources of information continue to rank higher in Google search results for Nicholas' related search terms.

Final thoughts
There are many holes and issues with Youngson's business practices and the validity of his copyright registrations. I intend on providing more useful data as our research team uncovers new evidence.

Since our research and correspondence is ongoing, we humbly ask the ELI community to continue submitting our Google Form replies for incident data. Again, you don't have to provide identification information if you are not comfortable with it. We just want to collect data on how often this situation is happening to other people in order to build our case. We won't share or use your information other than for compiled statistics - nothing else.

Report your Higbee demand letter incident: https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1 (https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1)

I hope that this new information is useful and I will continue updating the ELI community as we uncover new evidence.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on February 27, 2017, 03:58:29 PM
Update: He has another new site which distributes images from the origin site: http://www.creative-commons-images.com/nick-youngson-nyphotographic-com.html (http://www.creative-commons-images.com/nick-youngson-nyphotographic-com.html)

He seems to be very active with his development work.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on February 28, 2017, 03:59:46 PM
To be fair, the Creative Commons link is one that we are familiar with and how some people are obtaining Youngson's images. (I got another link confused with a new domain and website creative-commons-images.com which was only registered Feb. 18, 2017. Boy, this one is going to entrap more people.)

Regarding the new domain-website nick-youngson-photography.com, that is very interesting. It is only a couple weeks old.  It seems to be an educational website which is probably a good thing.

Maybe one article he needs to write about is using fine-print attribution rules as a financial honeypot.  Or how they can justify $5,000 demand letters for $10 images simply because someone didn't attribute the image.  After all, attribution is easily remedied if that is truly what he wants.

Or set settlement demands to a more reasonable amount.

But as we have said on ELI about some parties, for some, the honeypot effect and the subsequent financial windfall is too hard to resist.  Some use the infringement as a justification to gouge people for settlements.

And there are some photographers (beyond Youngson) who hide their names or use alias names to extract settlements from people.  Yes, that kind of information does find its way to ELI.

Update: He has another new site which distributes images from the origin site: http://www.creative-commons-images.com/nick-youngson-nyphotographic-com.html (http://www.creative-commons-images.com/nick-youngson-nyphotographic-com.html)

He seems to be very active with his development work.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: splitsecond on March 20, 2017, 06:08:36 PM
I recently received one of these letters as well. I want to highly encourage anyone who has received these letters to file a complaint with the California State Bar and include the information that ELI has compiled here. The attorney's involved are taking part in copyright abuse and likely in violation of several ethics rules. I will post the violations here after I have a chance to go through them.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: clist on March 23, 2017, 09:03:45 PM
Looks like the NYPhotographic Facebook page has now disappeared..
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: blueiis4u on March 28, 2017, 11:59:23 AM
I recently received one of these letters as well. I want to highly encourage anyone who has received these letters to file a complaint with the California State Bar and include the information that ELI has compiled here. The attorney's involved are taking part in copyright abuse and likely in violation of several ethics rules. I will post the violations here after I have a chance to go through them.

I have considered doing this as I agree, the attorney's conduct seems to be a violation of ethics rules, given the behavior of the client.  Has anyone else filed anything and if so, any response from the CA Bar?
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: ih8trolls on March 28, 2017, 01:43:08 PM
I'm interested in any response from CA BAR association as well. Need to file my own complaint with them ASAP.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Greg Troy (KeepFighting) on March 28, 2017, 08:07:52 PM
I think if all of you file complaints the BAR association would take it more seriously than if they received an individual complaint.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Small Startup on March 31, 2017, 01:04:23 PM
I just received a $5k letter as well for an image found in a CC Search. I would be willing to join any group complaint as well. Isn't there some legal action to be taken against these people, some form of class action? I'm not one to sue people, but this is outright victimization of people who are, more often than not, simply trying to provide a service and build something.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on April 03, 2017, 07:50:53 AM
Hello, here is an update on Nicholas Youngson.

He has continued to build new websites in order to clear ELI references from search results related to his name.

But he has notably made one massive change to his websites that offer "free" CC images - he now has a disclaimer at the top with more clear language on his mirror websites.

See the screenshot below from bluediamondgallery.com.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SLTdTT2h1amRBNVE/view?usp=sharing

He has also disabled "jphotostyle.com" and routed it to http://creative-commons-images.com.

It seems that the confusion created with his "licensing" has prompted action. Let's hope that it's more clear now to other innocent people looking for images.
Title: Higbee and Associates hiring case managers for copyright enforcement operation
Post by: kingkendall on April 03, 2017, 09:37:40 AM
Higbee and Associates are paying people $18 to $21 for case managers aka non lawyers to handle  their extortion letter operation Here is the link https://higbeeassociates.recruiterbox.com/jobs/fk06756

Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: nycopyrightabuse on April 03, 2017, 10:22:07 AM
Thanks for posting the link. This makes sense.

In my experience, their "case managers" only reply with canned responses with legal jargon they don't quite understand. There are also generally misspellings, grammar/wording issues, and other mistakes. They clearly don't have law experience. An attorney we hired responded to one of their emails and they did not acknowledge the response at all, just reiterated that they want the settlement check.
Title: Re: Higbee and Associates hiring case managers for copyright enforcement operation
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 03, 2017, 06:44:26 PM
This is a very good find and insightful. It seems likely this will get taken down at some point, so I am posting the text here so everyone can get the full and proper context.

==================

Case Manager- Full Time
Santa Ana, California, United States Full-time

National law firm seeks a qualified copyright case manager with a great work ethic to join its team in the firm's Santa Ana, CA office.

ABOUT THE LAW FIRM
We are a rapidly growing law firm with 70+ employees and in our 10th year. The law firm's goal is to not only have you play an important role in its success, but to also provide you with opportunities to develop your professional skills and be a part of a team of employees who have fun while working to solve problems for our clients.

DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES:
- Call opposing parties to collect overdue payments
- Call opposing parties to negotiate settlements
-Provide above and beyond customer support to clients
-Correspond with opposing parties and attorneys via e-mail, telephone, and postal mail
-Explain the nature of copyright laws & negotiate settlements with opposing parties.
-Follow up with non responsive opposing parties
-Complete research and perform screening of cases
-Maintain task lists and procedures
-Miscellaneous tasks, including mail, emails, and voicemails
 
REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS:
- Experience with debt collections or sales
-Bachelor's degree
-Strong research, written, and verbal communication skills
-Be organized, detail-oriented, and able to work well under pressure and deadlines
-Be able to multitask and interact with others professionally
-Be able to take initiative and work as part of a team
-Proficient with Microsoft Excel
-Ability to navigate web pages and work with web links including saving important Information from various websites.

SALARY AND BENEFITS:
- $18-$21 per hour, depending on experience
- Modest performance bonuses
- Medical benefits
- 401K after year one
- Paid vacation days after year one

IMPORTANT NOTE:
H&A is a dog friendly office. Those who are not comfortable around dogs or who have dog allergies should be advised that there are typically 3 or more dogs roaming the office.

IMPORTANT LEGAL MUMBO-JUMBO
We are an equal opportunity employer, meaning that we do not discriminate in favor of or against anyone based on age, race, religion, gender, ethnicity or any other legally protected class. Job description, duties and hours are subject to change. This is an at-will position.


Higbee and Associates are paying people $18 to $21 for case managers aka non lawyers to handle  their extortion letter operation Here is the link https://higbeeassociates.recruiterbox.com/jobs/fk06756

Any thoughts?
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 03, 2017, 07:08:02 PM
I am going to reiterate a few points (only my opinion).

1. It appears that Higbee has been recklessly and irresponsibly "collecting" and "extorting" without vetting his client. I am quite confident that most judges would NOT be sympathetic to Youngson's shenanigans of making $10 images available for commercial use under Creative Commons but if someone goofs up the attribution, a supposed infringer is now liable for $5,000.  There is no formula, rhyme, or reason that they will be able to explain.  They might say "ohh... we don't actually collect $5,000".  Which means that it was an INTENTIONAL LIE and fraud to begin with on their fishing expeditions when they sent out the $5,000 invoices!

2.  One thing that I see as potentially liable is the apparent zeal to disseminate Youngson's $10 images using misleading domain names capitalizing on the phrase "creative commons".  Hence, it is a honeypot.  This zeal in Youngson's attempt to disseminate and distribute his own images but then goes to Higbee and screams "INFRINGEMENT" is disengenous. Only recently is there even a half-ass attempt at disclosure. There is still no warning whatsoever that he will nail any users with a $5,000 collection effort for not making the proper attributions.

3.  Personally, if Youngson and Higbee ever decide to file suit on anyone, a counter-suit might be worth considering and responding to the their abusing the legal process (like the criminals at Prenda) taking legal advantage of the situation and profiting from the honeypot vs. a legitimate attempt to curtail illicit infringements.

4. I have spoken to a couple of people and we still have not seen anything that shows any good faith on Youngson's part.  It looks to be a very convenient money-making honeypot scam using $10 low value images.  It is low-value because the photographer prices it at near free prices. And DOES give it away with attributions.

5. It is pretty well known many copyright troll lawyers commit many ethically challenging actions. From everything I see, Higbee has been taking advantage of Youngson's honeypot setup and foolishly sending out boilerplate $5,000 letters (without vetting how Youngson does his work) that has little or not justification to the actual value of the photo.  And they should compare their experiences to the California state bar in which Higbee is based at.

If I were on the receiving end of these letters, I would not be so quick to roll over without gathering the information history of the last 2 years.

As far as I am concerned everyone should be paying close to attention and getting screenshots for their own records.


Hello, here is an update on Nicholas Youngson.

He has continued to build new websites in order to clear ELI references from search results related to his name.

But he has notably made one massive change to his websites that offer "free" CC images - he now has a disclaimer at the top with more clear language on his mirror websites.

See the screenshot below from bluediamondgallery.com.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SLTdTT2h1amRBNVE/view?usp=sharing

He has also disabled "jphotostyle.com" and routed it to http://creative-commons-images.com.

It seems that the confusion created with his "licensing" has prompted action. Let's hope that it's more clear now to other innocent people looking for images.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: kingkendall on April 03, 2017, 07:20:01 PM
Mathew Chan

Glad to contribute to the community.  But, I got a question of my own.  I got a call on my cell from a case manager for Higbee and Assocs.  I don't know how they got my cell number.  Is this legal?  My phone was charging at the time and it went to voice mail which I deleted.  This is a new wrinkle.  I don't answer any calls that I don't know.  It's been my practice for a long time.   So npted the call and will keep a log of any future calls to go along with the file I'm keeping on Higbee of all communications.  Has anybody else received calls to your cell?   
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: someco on April 04, 2017, 01:15:34 PM
Just want to thank Matthew Chan, nycopyrightabuse, kingkendall and others for the latest research. It looks like this is escalating. Does anyone have information about what types of legal/ethics violations to cite if making a CA Bar complaint against Mathew Higbee? Please do share. Somehow this operation should have a class action, but otherwise mass CA bar complaints can be the next best thing.
Also has anyone settled with them? My understanding from glancing at past posts is that even more-than-reasonable-sounding amounts like $750 etc have not been accepted. I'm not yet planning to settle but that's the amount a lawyer recommended I offer (i.e. make it worthwhile for Higbee to agree to your offer by offering an amount where 30-40% of it, which is likely his cut, is a decent amount).

FYI for my case - they went away for a couple of months and are now back with the "case manager" emails with grammatical errors et al. The recent text is "This case has escalated to my desk to assist Mr. Higbee in hope to resolve this mater without moving forward with litigation. I will be your point of contact before our litigation team takes over. Please advise if you like to make a reasonable offer to get this matter resolve." I am debating what to do, if anything.

FYI I found this information in another Higbee/Youngson thread on this forum very important for people mulling whether to settle at  some point or keep waiting - it seems that one of the community members discovered that Higbee has indeed filed federal court lawsuits (not yet on behalf of Youngson). http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/photog-nick-youngson-(higbee-assoc-)-lists-rm-media-ltd-in-template-lawsuit/msg20919/#msg20919.
While getting a lawsuit is not a big deal, for most tiny businesses and startups and even closed-out businesses which didn't take their websites down (many of their victims), $400-500/hr for lawyer fees (and some large retainer in some cases) is likely impossible, and Higbee knows this, and is banking on this. My (extremely limited, amateur) understanding is that while individuals can represent themselves in court (pro se), corporations need legal representation to do anything, including respond to something. (If this is not correct, please do chime in here) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/can-california-corporations-represent-themselves-nathan-mubasher.
Thanks, hope this helps.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: someco on April 04, 2017, 01:35:46 PM
@nycopyrightabuse - will you be  sharing the anonymized, quantified results you use for your company's response (based on the google form) with this community? That would be great and can be quoted by others in their response as well. Thanks.

Hello, I represent a U.S. company (name redacted as the complaint is proceeding) that received a settlement demand letter from Higbee & Associates (represented by Matthew Higbee) on behalf of Nicholas Youngson - the photographer and owner of http://nyphotographic.com (http://nyphotographic.com).

The reason I am posting is because we believe that Mr. Youngson is engaging in copyright abuse by engaging in deceptive and misleading business practices. That is, he is freely distributing his images and encouraging others to use them only to later issue settlement demand letters over copyright infringement.

I am going to explain the situation and ask the community for help in order to substantiate the claim that Mr. Youngson's business practices are a pattern of behavior (impacting many people) and he is well aware of the nuances of his actions.

The initial complaint by Youngson/Higbee
Higbee's initial complaint to us alleges that we used images on our website that violate his copyright. For brevity, I am only going to include evidence related to one image.

Full complaint link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SVTBtak9JdzBsRzA/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SVTBtak9JdzBsRzA/view?usp=sharing)

Here is a summary of the complaint:
  • Mr. Youngson's images are copyrighted (as of August, 2016)
  • We used five images on our website without a "license"
  • Mr. Higbee demanded the sum of $20,000.00 or otherwise we will be sued
Now, here is a link to the image in question -
"Obamacare Scrabble": https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SeWhwMXVjeTRta1E/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SeWhwMXVjeTRta1E/view?usp=sharing)

Investigation and findings
We spent weeks investigating the matter and found some strange oddities with regards to how Mr. Youngson operates his photography business.

First, he distributes his images for a fee on his primary website, http://nyphotographic.com (http://nyphotographic.com).

However, he also owns and operates a number of other image websites (the Mirrors), as many people in this community know:
  • Mirror websites
  • http://jphotostyle.com/ (http://jphotostyle.com/)
  • http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/ (http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/)
  • http://www.picserver.org/ (http://www.picserver.org/)
On his Mirror website, we obtained the same image from this URL: http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/wooden-tile/o/obamacare.html (http://www.thebluediamondgallery.com/wooden-tile/o/obamacare.html)

Note that at the top of the image, there is the following language:
Quote
The image below related to the word Obamacare 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, 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 rights managed license for a few dollars from NYPhotographic.com here

There is attribution language at the bottom of the image:
Quote
Free License permits: Sharing, copying and redistributing in any medium or format including adapting, remixing, transforming, and building upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. Attribution required.

Additionally, Mr. Youngson has images from his Mirror websites indexed by Google images and listed as "Free for commercial use with modification."

See the Google search result: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SMFVDejk5ZzNnTDA/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7ZbRXn38e7SMFVDejk5ZzNnTDA/view?usp=sharing)

But he does not allow his images to be indexed under the same licensing rights for his primary domain where he sells images.

Summary
In short, Mr. Youngson encourages others to take and use his images on Mirror websites, but sells them on his main website.

Interpretation
By distributing his images on the Mirror websites and presenting sparse and vague licensing information up front, there is a high possibility of confusion. It is this confusion that prompts any logical reader to ask the following questions:
  • Does Mr. Youngson own and operate the Mirror websites?
  • Why does Mr. Youngson allow the distribution of his copyrighted works on the Mirror websites?
  • Why does Mr. Youngson allow Google to index images on the Mirror websites with a “labeled for reuse” license?
  • Why does the copy on the Mirror websites prominently highlight free use language, while burying the attribution clause at the bottom?
  • Given Mr. Youngson’s core business of copyright licensing/collection and the plethora of other cases involving his Mirror websites, why hasn’t he reached out to the webmaster or modified the language in the copy of the Mirror websites to reduce end-user confusion?
Indeed, a reply from Mr. Higbee's office yielded the following response:
Quote
Each one of those domains mentioned is owned and managed by our client, Nick Youngson. He uses them as a platform to showcase his work. As I am sure you are aware, each image is available through a creative commons license. The terms of the Creative Commons 3.0 license can be found on the URLS that your [sic] provided. It also states that the top of the web page that attribution is required [sic].

Mr. Youngson is well-aware that his licensing/distribution causes confusion when reasonable parties look for images on the web and his counsel has not addressed the confusion in any capacity.

Abuse of copyright
In knowing that his distribution is the root-cause of the problem, Mr. Youngson has done nothing to amend his business practices. Instead, he has teamed up with a law firm (Higbee & Associates) to track down individuals who fall prey to this sort of "entrapment." Had his licensing terms and attribution stipulations been more prominently listed on his Mirror websites, I highly doubt many reasonable parties would use his images.

By allowing others to use and download his images under these circumstances, I believe that Mr. Youngson may be violating the U.S. Copyright laws by engaging in deceptive and misleading practices in an effort to gain settlement compensation.

We're asking for the community's help
We would like to conclude our business with Mr. Youngson and also ensure that others don't fall victim to the same deceitful enterprise. To do that, we must clearly establish a pattern of behavior by Mr. Youngson in the following areas:
  • Mr. Youngson is aware that his Mirror websites cause end-user confusion with reasonable parties looking for images
  • Mr. Youngson has pursued numerous copyright violations claims on the basis of his distribution on his Mirror website
  • Mr. Youngson refuses to amend the copy in his Mirror websites because he continues to profit from the confusion
This is the part where we need the community's help: if you have been impacted by a similar scenario involving Mr. Youngson's Mirror websites (listed above), please fill out the form linked below.

https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1 (https://goo.gl/forms/1v2I0uIyfLcF4PEj1)

Only include information you feel comfortable sharing. The replies will not be shared with the public (or anyone else) by myself or the company. If you do share your name, email and an incident summary, it will greatly increase the likelihood that Mr. Youngson will be prompted to amend his business practices and provide clear language on his Mirror websites. We only intend to share the total number of legitimate replies we receive with Mr. Higbee's firm.

Thank you all very much in advance. I hope that our effort in this endeavor will minimize the instance of settlement demand letters for ourselves and others.

You can also share any private emails with me using this dedicated email address: nyoungsoncopyrightabuse@gmail.com
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: kingkendall on April 04, 2017, 01:43:02 PM
This is exactly what Higbbe wants for people to fold under the preasure.  I'm in the same position but I look at it in terms of I'm one of hundreds.  I don;t want to be the low lying fruit.  So I'm hoding firm.  Is it a pain?  Yes!  But, I refuse to be taken advantage by somebody of low character.  That what Higbee a low character who say a busness medel he wanted to ge in one.  He's not even a intelectual prop lawyer.  His main businees is record expundgement.  Stay strong!
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: stinger on April 04, 2017, 02:39:44 PM
Does anyone have information about what types of legal/ethics violations to cite if making a CA Bar complaint against Mathew Higbee? Please do share.

My suggestion is to google the CA Bar Association code of conduct, read it, and make the best case you can for violations of that code of conduct.  That is what I did with attorney Lauren Kingston (who worked for Timothy McCormack's law firm) and the WA Bar Association. 

After I pressed my bar complaint, forcing her to hire an attorney to respond, on her behalf to the Bar, I never heard another word from her about their complaint against my firm.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: kingkendall on April 04, 2017, 05:01:05 PM
Here's a link to California code of conduct http://rules.calbar.ca.gov/Rules/RulesofProfessionalConduct.aspx

I'm giving it a read amd seriousdly considring making a complaint againt Higbbe.  But, I think more should do the same.  This way teh Cali Bar gets the message loud and clear
Title: Higbee and Associates put out Fake News
Post by: kingkendall on April 04, 2017, 09:34:54 PM
On Higbee's website they claim they were named one of the top hundred most active copyright litigation law firms for 2016 here's the link  https://www.higbeeassociates.com/named-top-100-most-active-copyright-firms-2016/https://www.higbeeassociates.com/named-top-100-most-active-copyright-firms-2016/

"Lex Machina, an industry leader in law firm analytics, named the Law Firm of Higbee & Associates as one of the top 100 most active copyright litigation law firms in 2016. Lex Machina helps clients find top law firms in various legal fields by analyzing a wide range of data. The Higbee & Associates Copyright Division helps protect the copyrights of a wide range of artists, including, but not limited to, photographers, authors, musicians, and painters."

However when I went to the   website  https://lexmachina.com/  I can't find such a list.  So I Googled:  Lex Machina most active copyright litigation 2016, nothing pops up except for Highbee's press release. 

I think this really is advertising to scare up business for his copyright extortion operation   
Title: Re: Higbee and Associates put out Fake News
Post by: Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi) on April 05, 2017, 11:13:19 AM
On Higbee's website they claim they were named one of the top hundred most active copyright litigation law firms for 2016 here's the link  https://www.higbeeassociates.com/named-top-100-most-active-copyright-firms-2016/https://www.higbeeassociates.com/named-top-100-most-active-copyright-firms-2016/

"Lex Machina, an industry leader in law firm analytics, named the Law Firm of Higbee & Associates as one of the top 100 most active copyright litigation law firms in 2016. Lex Machina helps clients find top law firms in various legal fields by analyzing a wide range of data. The Higbee & Associates Copyright Division helps protect the copyrights of a wide range of artists, including, but not limited to, photographers, authors, musicians, and painters."

However when I went to the   website  https://lexmachina.com/  I can't find such a list.  So I Googled:  Lex Machina most active copyright litigation 2016, nothing pops up except for Highbee's press release. 

I think this really is advertising to scare up business for his copyright extortion operation

The Bar association may see this as false advertising, which would also be a violation of the codes of conduct..
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on April 05, 2017, 02:16:12 PM
It isn't illegal to call someone. However, it becomes a grey area if you actually instruct someone in writing to cease-and-desist making phone calls to you.

Phone calls have been reported and written about. It doesn't come up often because most don't bother to go down that road.  Higbee is a growing operation and they are persistent but we have discovered glaring credibility issues. Higbee touts itself as a "national law firm" by renting or utilizing virtual addresses, for example.

I am not going to re-write it but there are a couple of posts somewhere where I wrote about how to deal with unwanted phone calls. Honestly, it is an epidemic beyond the whole extortion letter issue.  People phone spam me every day and I despise it.  Emails and phone calls. You might have to use the custom Google search bar above the forum.

Mathew Chan

Glad to contribute to the community.  But, I got a question of my own.  I got a call on my cell from a case manager for Higbee and Assocs.  I don't know how they got my cell number.  Is this legal?  My phone was charging at the time and it went to voice mail which I deleted.  This is a new wrinkle.  I don't answer any calls that I don't know.  It's been my practice for a long time.   So npted the call and will keep a log of any future calls to go along with the file I'm keeping on Higbee of all communications.  Has anybody else received calls to your cell?   
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: kingkendall on April 05, 2017, 02:40:36 PM
It isn't illegal to call someone. However, it becomes a grey area if you actually instruct someone in writing to cease-and-desist making phone calls to you.

Phone calls have been reported and written about. It doesn't come up often because most don't bother to go down that road.  Higbee is a growing operation and they are persistent but we have discovered glaring credibility issues. Higbee touts itself as a "national law firm" by renting or utilizing virtual addresses, for example.

I am not going to re-write it but there are a couple of posts somewhere where I wrote about how to deal with unwanted phone calls. Honestly, it is an epidemic beyond the whole extortion letter issue.  People spam all over.  Emails and phone calls. You might have to use the custom Google search bar above the forum.

Mathew Chan

 Thanks for answering my question. 
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: clist on April 05, 2017, 05:09:35 PM
Found it.

 ;)

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: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: another victim on April 18, 2017, 02:20:14 PM
I am dealing with one of these letters and am trying to see if I can get them to agree to something minimal to resolve.  I can tell you this, though; if I can't resolve it I intend to sue Higbee and Youngson in state court in Massachusetts for abuse of process, copyright abuse, and violation of the consumer protection law MGL ch 93A.  93A comes with very stiff penalties, including 3x damages and payment of atty's fees. It seems very clear to me from reviewing these posts and the manner in which people are duped into using what they think is a free image and then get faced with constant harassment and extortionate demands.

If anyone else is planning to take any legal action, I would appreciate knowing.  Also, I would appreciate knowing the data that NYcopyrightabuse has found from their survey if they would share it with the group.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Hkiss44 on July 19, 2017, 10:40:17 AM
My company has recently been notified from Higbee for two free images that were used based on search on free google search for commercial use.  Has the consensus been to settle so as not to run up expensive legal bills?
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: clist on July 19, 2017, 02:10:09 PM
The consensus has been to read the forums, get educated and then decide the best plan of action for your particular situation.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on July 19, 2017, 02:21:29 PM
Correct. Very concise and accurate answer. One solution does not fit all. Too many personality types with different risk tolerances and individual situations.

The consensus has been to read the forums, get educated and then decide the best plan of action for your particular situation.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: dbr on June 22, 2018, 08:37:50 PM
We recently received this letter in discussion. We would appreciate an update as to the work being done in this matter and would like to offer any help.
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: JohnInNY on October 25, 2018, 01:58:32 PM
I am going through the same issue with Higbee with the same photographer.
Any updates here?
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: marketer44 on October 30, 2018, 08:36:55 PM
We recently received a letter about the same matter. @nycopyrightabuse and @splitsecond.... Please update this forum with the solution to this corroboration.

@splitsecond : What did the CA Bar write back to you when you mailed in a formal complaint?

@nycopyrightabuse: How did your case end? What did you use as evidence to fight or case?

@Matthew Chan: Please help to confirm the legitimacy of these users as they stated they have reached out to you regarding these matters, and would be getting back to you with facts about their legitimacy to " hammering all of the details out in a swift fashion and to your satisfaction".

Thank you guys! Looking forward to putting this behind me!
Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Ethan Seven on October 31, 2018, 10:50:41 AM
Here is some information from various threads on this forum to consider when evaluating claims made by RM Media.

- If you have not already done so, remove the image or comply with license attribution requirements
- The demand amount is negotiable, so you can offer them a substantially lower amount
- RM Media has filed several lawsuits in the US.
- If you look like you do not have assets, you are way less likely to get sued.
- If they sue you, they will probably ask for much more money than they are now.
- If you are comfortable with the risk of getting sued, you can trying ignoring it and hope they do not sue you for three years, after that, it will be beyond the statute of limitations for that particular claim. 
- If they do sue you, they will try to use the fact that you did not offer to settle the claim against you in effort to persuade the judge to make you pay their attorneys fees.
- Have an attorney evaluate your claim for possible defenses to infringement, such as fair use or for mitigating factors that would give you leverage to reduce or eliminate liability

Higbee & Associates has no record of adverse action from any state bar association.   Draw whatever inferences you like from that when considering how worth while it is to spend your time complaining to the state bar.  If you think their client’s claim has no merit, you or your attorney can tell it to the judge in the form of a motion to dismiss and for sanctions.

Finally, read my important disclaimer below. 



Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: ohhellno on November 02, 2018, 11:44:32 AM
Everyone impacted by Nick Youngson claims really should read and understand the Memorandum of Law filed by Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C. in their case against Higbee and Youngson. Essentially it boils down to whether the attribution requirement of the Creative Commons license was a covenant (a term of the contract that would allow Youngson to sue for breach of contract and damages, but not copyright violation) or a condition (failing to attribute means that the license was invalid, and thus allowing Youngson to bring a copyright violation claim). The Youngson websites "mysteriously" changed for many images this summer to add language stating that attribution is a CONDITION, highlighting (IMO) that previously it was a covenant. Because most people make zero dollars off their images, they have no damages to sue under the covenant/breach of contract claim. Youngson also conveniently scrubbed the websites off the wayback machine around the same time, likely to hide the fact that it previously stated it was just "required" = covenant. Luckily we were able to capture an image before they did this, so we have pictures of the "before" and "after" showing how they changed the language on the website to try to retroactively make attribution a condition. I think that Youngson/Higbee realized they messed up, and so added the language to make their honeypot more effective. But what that means is that everyone caught up in this scam prior to the website being edited MAY have a strong argument that there was only a failed covenant of the license (which basically means no $ for Youngson/Higbee), but no basis for a copyright violation claim (where the big bucks are). Everyone getting letters from them should obviously consult an attorney in their jurisdiction, but I think the MOL is a useful read.

https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/new-york/nyedce/2:2018cv03353/418211/11/0.pdf

Title: Re: Nicholas Youngson Photographer (Rep. by Higbee Associates) Copyright Abuse
Post by: Matthew Chan on November 02, 2018, 06:17:31 PM
It seems that nycopyrightabuse has moved on by the lack of response. My speculation is that he probably settled the matter as most people do to simply have closure.

And I confirmed that the original poster had honorable intentions and what they were trying to do. However, it was THEIR approach and efforts.  I neither endorse or condemn their efforts. Generally speaking, I don't go out of my way to find out how people resolve their cases.  People generally report back to me if they feel inclined.

@nycopyrightabuse: How did your case end? What did you use as evidence to fight or case?

@Matthew Chan: Please help to confirm the legitimacy of these users as they stated they have reached out to you regarding these matters, and would be getting back to you with facts about their legitimacy to " hammering all of the details out in a swift fashion and to your satisfaction".