Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received extortion letter from Masterfile... Have some questions

« on: August 31, 2013, 02:01:22 PM »

Thanks everyone! Much appreciated. 

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received extortion letter from Masterfile... Have some questions

« on: August 29, 2013, 07:45:49 PM »

Hi Oscar,

Thank you so much for taking the time to reply to my post—I know how busy you are. I can't express enough how much these forums mean and I know we would be freaking out if we didn't have them.

I read the entire case file for Chaga, which really was a God send for me. I know there were a lot of images and a lot of copyright registration numbers in this case.

Imagine how surprised I was to see that the same copyright registration number (different image however) that Masterfile lost in the Chaga case, is the same one they sent me "the letter" for.

We've had several emails back and forth and I cited the Chaga case and I asked for an individual copyright registration for the image. Of course they didn't have an individual one. They cited some other cases, which they felt would increase the validity of their appeal, and that they are currently appealing the Chaga case, and were confident their copyright registrations would hold up, so we should pay $1,360.

I offered them $250 to settle which we felt was a decent amount—especially since as it stands right now, the copyright for that image has been ruled invalid.

They send me back an email stating that we obviously didn't want to settle the matter amicably so they are going to pursue action and harass my client.

I am guessing this is where the NCS start insisting a debt is owed?

Any advice is appreciated.

Thank you.

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received extortion letter from Masterfile... Have some questions

« on: August 07, 2013, 12:28:21 PM »

Thanks everyone.

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received extortion letter from Masterfile... Have some questions

« on: August 05, 2013, 02:33:33 PM »

Thanks for the reply Robert, much appreciated.

We haven't done anything except send an email to MF and ask that they deal with us and not our client. We haven't admitted to anything, where the image came from, etc. All we did was inform them that we had received their letter along with the snapshot from the website and that we had removed the image immediately once we received it.

As we said, this image was obtained from a blog offering free images for use. There wasn't any copyright on it and the image doesn't match MF's image 100%. Not sure where along the lines it was altered but we have read it doesn't matter if the image is altered or not. It's about a 20% difference from the original photo MF claims they own the copyright to.

We always buy our images and as I stated, we didn't use this image as intent to commit copyright infringement. Our client does not pay us for any of our work and is a family member. We create a few banner ads for them each year and this is where the image was used. All the other images on the website are photographs that we personally took. The website does not sell anything and receives no income from their website. It is merely a business presence for a small mom and pop operation that does not receive that much traffic.

Knowing everything that we know now (and we will NEVER use an image that is supposedly "free" again) what is the best course of action for us to take?

We have our "need to reply back to them" date and from what we have read we know this is a bully tactic they use to get people to panic and just pay. We are so glad to have found this forum and to understand that we don't have to pay what they are demanding.

The price they sent was for a license to use the photo for a year (as we read on this forum is standard practice for them). The image was up less than a month. Should we ask them to send us the copyright for that particular image? Should we reference the court case they lost using batched copyright files? Should we offer them what we feel is a fair price for that image based on how long it was used?

Any help in sending a reply is appreciated. Thank you to everyone on here and for your help. Obviously, we want to send the best reply possible.

Thanks again.

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Received extortion letter from Masterfile... Have some questions

« on: August 03, 2013, 05:35:59 PM »

This is an excellent forum and I have found a lot of great advice. I have spent a lot of time reading and doing research on here. I am hoping someone can clear up some of my confusion on these extortion letters.

My client and I reside in the U.S. and as you know Masterfile is in Canada. My client received a Federal Express letter showing an image in question and demanding a sum of over $2K. We immediately removed the image in question (only one image) that was used in an ad on their website. This is a very small business and as we have seen they tend to target them.

We purchase stock images to create designs and sometimes when we receive a blog on LinkedIn with "free" graphics, vectors, etc. we will use them on occasion. This is one time we shouldn't have. The image that we got that was supposedly a free to use royalty-free image matches an image on Masterfile's site. The blog is no longer around. If you look at the two images you can see they are very similar in nature and that although not exactly the same image...the person who posted the image could have posted a new variation of it or changed the image themselves. It is not 100% the same though.

Here are my questions:

1.  We sent an email to MF informing them that we were taking responsibility for this issue and that they were to leave our client alone.
2.  MF immediately reduced the damages owed from about $2000 to $1300 which is still nuts. At no time have we discussed the image with them or asked them to reduce the amount. It's what they sent back immediately. This is a common image that can be bought on the other stock photography sites for around $19-40 depending where you look. Nothing special about it at all.
3.  We looked up the copyright notice they sent and it is a compilation of works filed under Masterfile with a typewritten list of over 30 photographers. They claim it is an exclusive photo to them but we did find it on one other site under the same photographer.
4. The copyright form MF sent us isn't filled out correctly and just has a list of all the photographers and it is for a CD comp of all works. The title of the work for this image isn't on this copyright form. In fact none of the titles of work are on the form. We did find other copyright forms with this photographer's name but none of these matched the copyright number we were given.
5.  We read about the lawsuit where they dropped the charges (I believe it was called Chenga?) because MF had used the compilation method. So are we in violation if this is the same method they used? Is this even a valid copyright form?

If anyone could share any info with us or their experiences, we would appreciate it. We get that they don't care if we removed the image immediately or that we didn't use it on purpose and acquired it from a bad source. We don't make any money helping out this client and we do it to be nice. The economy here isn't that great and we help out with a few ads here and there so we wouldn't be paying that type of money for such a common image for a client that basically has no money to begin with for advertising.

We don't mind paying a reasonable amount but it looks like what we feel is reasonable and what they feel is reasonable is going to be the sticky part.

Thanks!