1051
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Statue of Limitations?
« on: May 26, 2009, 05:01:23 PM »
Normally, its three years.
| Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program | |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1052
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: need direction please
« on: May 13, 2009, 01:22:13 PM »
Try sending them to my personal address xxx
1053
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: need direction please
« on: May 11, 2009, 10:34:04 PM »
Dear Bob:
Most of the businesses that got into this situation got into it because of templates, so you are not alone. About one-third of the 120 plus businesses we represent on this are web developers who have hired us on behalf of customers of theirs who got Getty letters. So you are not alone their either. Can you obtain the name of the site where you got the templates from? I can check to see if we have other cases that have dealt with it.
As for putting you out of business, that all depends on how many images are involved and whether it will be likely if you are sued. Our letter fee remains $150 so that should help as once we respond for you Getty can no longer contact you directly and we can try and resolve it for you. I can be reached at my office tomorrow morning between 9-10AM at 1 800 640 2000 or shoot me an email at xxx with your contact info and I will respond
Most of the businesses that got into this situation got into it because of templates, so you are not alone. About one-third of the 120 plus businesses we represent on this are web developers who have hired us on behalf of customers of theirs who got Getty letters. So you are not alone their either. Can you obtain the name of the site where you got the templates from? I can check to see if we have other cases that have dealt with it.
As for putting you out of business, that all depends on how many images are involved and whether it will be likely if you are sued. Our letter fee remains $150 so that should help as once we respond for you Getty can no longer contact you directly and we can try and resolve it for you. I can be reached at my office tomorrow morning between 9-10AM at 1 800 640 2000 or shoot me an email at xxx with your contact info and I will respond
1054
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Windows Vista sample images
« on: May 06, 2009, 05:57:04 PM »
Good catch
1055
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Windows Vista sample images
« on: May 05, 2009, 10:58:45 PM »
Lettered that was interesting (as always) - so if Microsoft bought (licensed) the images from Getty and your use can be held to comply with the EULA, then it s not an infringement unless Microsoft is violating the terms of its license with Getty which would make Microsoft responsible for damages That's a nice deep pocket to be able to go after
1056
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Windows Vista sample images
« on: May 05, 2009, 08:58:04 AM »
Hey Bulldog:
I answered him in an email that the DMCA may protect him as it protects those sites that allow others to upload content. If he qualifies under the act, then Getty would have been required to send him a cease and desist notice first. I wonder if Getty has contacted Microsoft about these images. I don't have Vista but I also wonder if there is disclaimer language in the EULA or elsewhere that says Microsoft does not guarantee the orginality of any of the images. But if Getty could show that Microsoft is using its copyrighted images without permission, then it might be onto a valid claim worth pursuing. One wonders why Microsoft wouldn't use Corbis images since Bill Gates owns that company. It just shows you how anyone can fall into this situation even the mighty Microsoft
I answered him in an email that the DMCA may protect him as it protects those sites that allow others to upload content. If he qualifies under the act, then Getty would have been required to send him a cease and desist notice first. I wonder if Getty has contacted Microsoft about these images. I don't have Vista but I also wonder if there is disclaimer language in the EULA or elsewhere that says Microsoft does not guarantee the orginality of any of the images. But if Getty could show that Microsoft is using its copyrighted images without permission, then it might be onto a valid claim worth pursuing. One wonders why Microsoft wouldn't use Corbis images since Bill Gates owns that company. It just shows you how anyone can fall into this situation even the mighty Microsoft
1057
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: End user Demand Letter Masterfile Corporation
« on: May 04, 2009, 03:55:02 PM »
See my answer to your other post or call me at 1 800 640 2000
1058
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Corporation
« on: May 04, 2009, 03:54:27 PM »
Dear mgale:
What Masterfile is doing is not illegal. They have registered copyright in the images they protect so it should be fairly easy to prove whether they have a claim or not. As an end user, you are technically responsible for any copyright infringement though you would be able to go after the content provider for reimbursement of whatever you paid Masterfile. It would certainly be in the content providers interest to settle globally with Masterfile as opposed to have to handle each claim as it comes in. There maybe a number of defenses to the claim as well. At the very least you are an "innocnet infringer" which could greatly reduce any damage award you would be facing. I have handled many Masterfile matters so if either you or the content provider (or both) want to discuss this with me please give me a call 1 800 640 2000. You should also review some of the posts on the issue to familiarize yourself better with the situation.
What Masterfile is doing is not illegal. They have registered copyright in the images they protect so it should be fairly easy to prove whether they have a claim or not. As an end user, you are technically responsible for any copyright infringement though you would be able to go after the content provider for reimbursement of whatever you paid Masterfile. It would certainly be in the content providers interest to settle globally with Masterfile as opposed to have to handle each claim as it comes in. There maybe a number of defenses to the claim as well. At the very least you are an "innocnet infringer" which could greatly reduce any damage award you would be facing. I have handled many Masterfile matters so if either you or the content provider (or both) want to discuss this with me please give me a call 1 800 640 2000. You should also review some of the posts on the issue to familiarize yourself better with the situation.
1059
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Windows Vista sample images
« on: May 03, 2009, 03:56:39 PM »
This is pretty interesting, we have come across images claimed by Getty that come from CD packs and the like , but have not been told about this Vista issue. I would ask that you send me via email (xxx) the screen shots, etc. If this checks out I think we need to really advertise this on the net and to Microsoft. If anyone else has heard anything about this please let us know as well.
Thanks for the post
Thanks for the post
1060
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Demand in Australia
« on: May 01, 2009, 08:56:01 AM »
Dear awaldo:
Thanks for the post. We have been contacted by many Australian companies over this issue, but haven't been able to get directly involved because of course I cannot represent a company in Australia. Companies that are in countries that follow UK copyright law are more protected than thoise here in the States. That may explain why while Getty has filed a dozen or so lawsuits in the US, to my knowledge they have never filed any in Australia. The only danger of ignoring it is if Getty continues to pursue your customer, the customer may make an unreasonable settlement and then look to tyou for reimbursement. I suggest trying to get your colleauge to pay for your lawyer to write one more letter - saying that the lawyer (or you) are authorized to represent the customer and then the customer should be left alone. While most lawyers would be reluctant to tell a client to "ignore" a legal matter, in this case, it is not likely that Getty will sue you over a few images when you have proof of innocent infringement. I think it would be prudent to wait to see if suit is filed before engaging Gettty any further once the client issue has been resolved.
Thanks for the post. We have been contacted by many Australian companies over this issue, but haven't been able to get directly involved because of course I cannot represent a company in Australia. Companies that are in countries that follow UK copyright law are more protected than thoise here in the States. That may explain why while Getty has filed a dozen or so lawsuits in the US, to my knowledge they have never filed any in Australia. The only danger of ignoring it is if Getty continues to pursue your customer, the customer may make an unreasonable settlement and then look to tyou for reimbursement. I suggest trying to get your colleauge to pay for your lawyer to write one more letter - saying that the lawyer (or you) are authorized to represent the customer and then the customer should be left alone. While most lawyers would be reluctant to tell a client to "ignore" a legal matter, in this case, it is not likely that Getty will sue you over a few images when you have proof of innocent infringement. I think it would be prudent to wait to see if suit is filed before engaging Gettty any further once the client issue has been resolved.
1061
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Famous letter in.... the Netherlands!
« on: April 29, 2009, 10:30:00 PM »
It is common practice to send a cease and desist letter first but it is not the law (in the US anyway) unless the infringement is covered under the new DMCA where internet service providers are entitled to a letter before litigation. Haven't come across a Dutch attorney willing to pick up my model yet
1062
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Corporation
« on: April 29, 2009, 10:26:21 PM »
It will depend on when Masterfile filed its copyright. One of the things I have found dealing with Masterfile and Getty is that sometimes even though the photographers promise not to to make their images available anywhere else other than the site that licenses it, they have forgotten or intentionally lied to Getty/Masterfile and in fact either previously or subsequently licensed their photos for other uses. if you can show a clear chain as you describe, you may be in a good position. I will be in my office tomorrow after 1030am (NYC time) 1-800-640-2000
1063
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: How do we retain Oscar Michelen?
« on: April 17, 2009, 11:49:11 PM »
you can email me at xxx or call my office on Monday at 516 248 8000
1064
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: NEED VERIFICATION
« on: April 15, 2009, 10:20:15 PM »
No it costs less than $50 to copyright something if you do it yourself, but multiply that by thousands and thousands of images and soon you're talking about real money.
1065
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: NEED VERIFICATION
« on: April 13, 2009, 02:32:20 PM »
That's correct lettered. But its hard for a judge to overlook how a person got the image and it may unintentionally influence what a judge awards on actual damages. Also in court, I would like to argue that it would be unfair to award more in actual damages than a judge would have awarded in statutory damages. If a judge would be inclined to reduce statutory damages to $200 based on the innocence of the infringement then he should cap actual damages to that amount as well. To do otherwise would be to reward Getty for not registering their images by giving them more under actual damages than they would receive under statutory damages. While the statute allows entities to choose between statutory and actual damages, so that someone who might get more under actual damages can do so, that contemplates that the person had registered the work before the infringement. The whole purpose of denying statutory damages in infringement of non-registered works is to encourage registering works. This is novel argument but I think it has a good basis to it.
Official ELI Help Options |
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |