Messages

1006

Getty Images Letter Forum / Masterfile Class Action Apparently Settled in Masterfile's Favor

« on: September 11, 2009, 06:00:16 PM »

Just wanted to alert everyone to the status of the class action lawsuit filed against Masterfile in Nevada. It appears that the Plaintiff settled by paying Masterfile's claims for an unstated amount! Plaintiffs in turn dropped their class action.  I am trying to get more details about what occurred.

You may recall that the lawsuit claimed that Masterfile was seeking damages for infringement of images it had allegedly licensed to a web template designer.  The claim was that while Masterfile may have later retracted or refused to renew the license to the designer, the company was still seeking damages for lawful use that occurred during the license period.  

I would be curious to know how much the plaintiff paid and why the sudden turnaround.

1007

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Where's Oscar

« on: September 10, 2009, 04:01:26 PM »

Chris:

Couldn't  identify you from your posts - can you call me at my office 1 800 640 2000 or email me at xxx.  All open letters have been sent to Getty I just want to match you up to the client on the letter so I can send you your copy.  Thanks!

1008

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Settlement copyright letter from Super Stock

« on: September 10, 2009, 03:59:06 PM »

I am handling a handful of Superstock cases, they are not anywhere near as active as Getty and Masterfile, but they seem to be closer in pattern to Getty, in that they tend not to sue over a few images.  I would be glad to assess your situation if you want to send me an email of the letters you've received.  My address is xxx

1009

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Website Archive

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:10:22 PM »

Yes Google "caches" websites for period of time as well so you should always clear your Google cache so that the allegedly infringing images don't remain as well.  Here's a link to the Wiki page on how to clear a browser's cache

www.wikihow.com/Clear-Your-Browser's-Cache

1010

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Famous letter in.... the Netherlands!

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:08:13 PM »

Thanks for the update and yes, please keep us posted !

1011

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Can we just ignore the Getty Settlement demand?

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:07:32 PM »

Thanks

1012

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Can we just ignore the Getty Settlement demand?

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:07:03 PM »

Thanks as well.  Will pass it onto my staff

1013

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is this sound legal advice?

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:06:13 PM »

I agree with Matt that I would not just ignore it but respond in a way that also lets them know that you will not pay unreasonable settlement demands.  Keep us posted

1014

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Help from Switzerland

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:02:49 PM »

Thanks for the post and the update

1015

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Where's Oscar

« on: September 03, 2009, 05:02:03 PM »

Dear Chris and All:

Thank you for your post and Thanks Matt for responding on my behalf. Chris - What happened was that the letter went out without the draft being sent to you, but it did go out in a timely fashion to Getty.  I once again am out of the office until Tuesday 9-8-09 and will scan and send you the letter that went out on letterhead.  So rest assured that the matter itself was not ignored, there was just a breakdown in the communication and for that I apologize.  Matt is correct that many folks have responded with requests for help and many more folks contact us with questions or after they have already settled so we cannot help them. But one of the things that I have always prided myself on is that just because i lowered my fee to make it easier for folks to address this issue, I would never want to lower my standards and whether you pay my firm our regular $450 per hour rate or our $150 Getty rate, you should expect the same service.  Matt is correct that things got kind of busy at my firm (on non-Getty matters) and I had to take a business trip to Atlanta and had other significant drains on my time in the office. So I am sorry for the lapse and will do all I can to make sure it does not happen again.  As you can tell from this forum, this is clearly an exception to the way we handle Getty claims and I am sorry to have caused you concern .  We'll be in touch on 9-8

Oscar

1016

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Re-Introducing Attorney Oscar Michelen through New Online Video!

« on: August 26, 2009, 12:22:26 PM »

Looks great Matt! Thanks!

1017

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New victim (UK) - used vista sample picture

« on: August 26, 2009, 12:21:47 PM »

I would review the FSB forum site summary page.  This is a UK based forum on the Getty issue and the forum administrator "beedee" has posted a very useful summary.  We have a link to the forum on our home page. You should find lots of useful info their.  Good Luck!

1018

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Recent Intellectual Property Legal Issues

« on: August 26, 2009, 12:19:19 PM »

Goober:

I would start by following the instructions on their terms of use page and emailing them at [email protected] with your complaint. Keep us posted

1019

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Used Swishzone.com movie and now Getty Images wants to get me too

« on: August 23, 2009, 08:52:54 AM »

I think you have a good legal position  I also do not think that Getty will take this on over one image.  I would stop engaging them at this point as they are next likely to send this to NCS recovery - their "collection agent"  If you want to perhaps send a letter offering a token settlement amount (like $100) as a good faith effort to resolve it, that would be one thing.  But thats about it.  I think it is highly unlikely that they will sue you. Good luck and keep us posted

1020

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: August 10, 2009, 09:37:01 AM »

As I have written on this and othr forums, The US Copyright Act needs to be amended to add a section mirroring the UK law which states that there are no damages in cases of innocent infringement provided the party ceases and desists upon being given notice. That would shift the focus onto thoise who infirnge intentionally.