Messages

1021

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

« on: August 09, 2009, 01:06:26 PM »

Much has been made about the recent decisions awarding large statutory damages in the most recent RIAA (song download) cases.  The case to have gotten the most attention is RIAA v. Tenenbaum in which a jury awarded $22,000 per downloaded song. I think two critical differences distinguish the Getty issue from Tenenbaum.  First, Mr. Tenenbaum had the illegally downloaded songs on a Peer-To_peer website.  That meant that he would open his computer up and allow anyone else in the world to also download the songs he had on his server. So he also   distributed the images in addition to possessing them.  Second, the jury found it was a willful infringement -which makes sense.  Who doesn't know that recorded and published music is subject to copyright?  In the Getty issue the vast majority of alleged infringers had no reason to believe they were using copyrighted images.  

I think these two points make Tenenbaum inapplicable to Getty cases. We should all keep an eye on the case anyway to see if the jury award in Tenebaum will be upheld.

1022

Getty Images Letter Forum / Free Photos: Fully Legitimate and Legal

« on: August 06, 2009, 04:11:38 PM »

Hey everyone:

Very often Matt and I are asked about where to acquire digital images from in the post Pic Scout, Digimark, demand letter era. Matt even put up a post on the subject.  I thought it would be good to make everyone aware that Uncle Sam is a good source.  Government works are not copyrightable as they belong to the public. So you can go to usa.gov and search the Graphics page for excellent pictures on a variety of topics. I also found a site that provides links to several government sites that have free photos for download:

 http://www.dotgovwatch.com/index.php?/archives/8-The-Best-Copyright-Free-Photo-Libraries.html

Even Getty can't compete against Free!

1023

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: August 06, 2009, 04:07:39 PM »

You are right lettered.  In my haste I thought it also provided a list of page views

1024

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: August 05, 2009, 09:17:45 PM »

Goober:

One such site is  http://domain-history.domaintools.com/ . They  have a history of websites, but I can’t find any way to remove  sites without paying$10 a day for each day the history isn’t active. Any comments or advice on this issue would be appreciated

1025

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

« on: August 05, 2009, 09:12:55 PM »

Will call you tomorrow to update

1026

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: hi Oscar, Trying to get in contact

« on: August 05, 2009, 09:11:22 PM »

WIll call you tomorrow

1027

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

« on: July 28, 2009, 11:13:35 AM »

Dear Naomi:

While we wait for Nelis to respond, I can say that I have not heard of a lawsuit actually having been filed in the Netherlands.  Hopefully Nelis can give us an update and tell us the statuts of his case at this time.

1028

Getty Images Letter Forum / Removing posts for legal services

« on: July 24, 2009, 09:55:29 AM »

Dear Jonathan:

We deleted your post not because we wanted to have a monopoly (on cases that I lose money on), but because I did not have time to reach out to you to assess your intentions and to see if you agree with the general theme and goals of this site.  I am away in Boston until Monday and will touch base with you when I get back.  But, Matt and I have worked very hard to have this be an informative site - not a business site.  We don't sell links, advertisements, etc.  I added the $150 letter program to give folks a resource to address the Getty problem. When Masterfile and now Corbis jumped into the fray I agreed to take those cases on for $150 per hour (as opposed to my $450-500 per hour standard IP retainer). Matt and I have also developed a very clear and particular philosophy on where we stand on these issues and we want to make sure we stay on message.  
 
This site is not a money-maker by any means - believe me. For every one company that retains me for the $150 - that's $150 Jonathan- I answer six to seven emails and forum posts for folks who have questions but don't retain me. The $150 covers two letters by the way, and at least one or two phone calls between my office and the client and/or my office and Getty. If that is the service you are willing to provide let me know and we will talk about it. This is a labor of love that Matt and I have worked on for over a year now and which has been the first place in the country to take this issue on and give some relief to folks.  Forgive me if I get territorial about it when I see another lawyer trying to use it for advertising purposes but I really resent the tone and implication of your post. Feel free to check out my educational background and experience,the kinds of cases, clients that I have represented and tell me that $150 for all of the above is  a money-maker for me.  Matt meanwhile makes nothing from the site so what is his financial motivation?

Let's be clear that you are not "offering a resource" as we are - you are offering your services on a paid basis. You have never answered a post on this site and did not offer any advice. You did not even tell our forum anything about the one Masterfile claim you have handled. So please be clear that your motivation and your post was purely financial.

Oscar

1029

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Help from Switzerland

« on: July 24, 2009, 09:36:27 AM »

Dear eli:

You will have to get some advice from a Swiss intellectual property lawyer as the laws vary from nation to nation.  Switzerland, for example has had legal cases arising out of the "copyrightability" of photos.  In one case the high court held there was copyright in  a photo of Bob Marley because of the artistic quality of the image; in another it held there was no copyright in an image of a person holding two books because it lacked "originality."  You would need to examine the image at issue against those two cases and Swiss law to see how your case fits in.  Getty has not been known to sue over a single image, but that you were contacted by a Swiss attorney is also unusual.  They usually don't involve counsel and handle it internally.  

I was unable to determine if Swiss law has an "innocent infringement" defense like many other countries' laws do. So I really can't give much more guidance than that.  Hopefully you can find a lawyer in your area that will answer your questions in a free consultation.  Good Luck and keep us posted please.  

Oscar

1030

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

« on: July 21, 2009, 04:40:56 PM »

will do

1031

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

« on: July 08, 2009, 01:19:23 PM »

Thanks Goober for the excellent info.  I will check into the new case and report back.  Let me tell you what I have found out about the earlier case you told us about. It has just been filed by the plaintiff and they are awaiting Masterfile's response. That claim is about a very specific situation so I don't knwo how much applicability it will have to Masterfile's letter program.  What the plaintiff in that lawsuit claims is that Masterfile licensd several dozen images to a company for use in website development.  That company paid Masterfile for the right to use the images.  Masterfile then bought the rights back from that company. Masterfile is now sending out letters to folks who purchased websites from the company during the limited time when it had the right to use the images. I think that a a very clear claim against Masterfile and am anxious to see how they deal with it. I have been in contact with the attorney's office who is handling that case and will keep the forum updated on any progress. We are also waiting to see what happens to the class action brought against Getty by top-notch photograhers.  Both sides have made motions for summary judgment and we will let all of you knwo what happens when something occurs.

1032

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

« on: July 08, 2009, 01:12:50 PM »

Thanks lettered for your response.  Readers of this thread should also look at my latest response to ariella's other post.

1033

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: INSTRUCTIONS FOR ARCHIVE.ORG REMOVAL, AND GettyIMAGES CRIMINAL LAWSUITS

« on: July 08, 2009, 01:10:47 PM »

Thank you Lettered for responding so quickly and well to Ariella's posts.

Dear Ariella: I admire your energy and commitment but what Getty is doing is not illegal. When a photographer takes a photograph that photographer has copyright protection in the photograph. Now if the photo itself is picture of ANOTHER copyrighted work, say a Roy Liechtenstein painting, then of course the photographer does not get copyright in the Liechtenstein work and he may not even be allowed to use the photo of the painting in any commercial capacity provided it is not a a "fair use."  

These photographers for a number of reasons have then transferred their copyright rights to Getty under a licensing agreement. That agreement gives Getty the EXCLUSIVE right to sell/license the images and also therefore pursue copyright infringement. While it may be impolite, secretive, etc. for Getty to say tht they will not show someone the license agreements  that is not illegal.  To use your example, I can write you a letter saying I broke my leg in your store and that I will sue unless you pay X amount and then refuse to show you any proof of my claim.  Is it a good way to resolve a dispute of course not.  And that is one of my principal objections to the way Getty is handling this issue.  But it is not illegal -neither criminally or civilly, so please stop advising folks on this site that it is and that they should call the police. I am involved in a litigation with Getty now and I have seen lawsuits they have filed in various courts around the country.  When they come to court, they produce the required proof - both the copyright registrations and the license agreements. So they have a good faith basis for making their demands.  

Your final point that your website is your intellectual property once you put it up does not allow you to make a website using other people's intellectual property. So please, we have endeavored very hard to keep the information on this site accurate so that people who get these letters know what their options are. Please read my summary and follow up posts to get better acquainted with the legal issues in this area.

1034

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received Getty Images Letter this morning

« on: July 08, 2009, 12:54:19 PM »

Thanks for the post. In the UK you don't have to pay damages in cases of innnocent infringement which makes your case easier to resolve than those here in the US. I suggest you read the FSB Forum summary post.  A link is on our homepage.  That is a comprehensive UK forum on the Getty issue.

1035

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

« on: July 01, 2009, 06:12:50 PM »

Will check it out and report back to the forum