Messages

121

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Science Photo Library

« on: May 21, 2015, 05:14:51 PM »

Well said, Mulligan.  But I do understand DavidVGoliath's situation.  We usually take the side of the innocent or unknowing infringer, but what about the side of the innocent photographer.

If someone were to take one of DavidVGoliath's images that is registered and posts it on a Creative Commons website, and then you or I use it thinking it was legitimately posted, DavidVGoliath has been damaged as well.

And the laws, as they are written(and truly broken), allow him to go after both parties.

We need to get after Congress to fix these laws.  This is something photogs should be behind as well.

122

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Here's Another Extortion Letter

« on: May 14, 2015, 10:12:42 AM »

I agree with not acknowledging for the time being. 

It is possible they may have gotten the screen shot using waybackmachine.org.  I am not certain about the legality of their pressing a case discovered this way.  After all, if they find the image on another machine that says you were hosting it at some point in the past, they really haven't found you hosting it.

Maybe someone else can speak to this point.

123

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Here's Another Extortion Letter

« on: May 14, 2015, 08:57:16 AM »

The Statute of Limitations begins on the date that they discover the image mis-appropriation.  If you can prove that they discovered it in 2013, then you are correct that you are more than half-way through the statute period.

I had Getty come at me in 2012 for images that were posted in 2005.  In my mind, my statute expired 3 years after I received their first letter in 2012 because that  is the earliest date I could prove that they knew of the mis-appropriation.

124

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty images Gets sued...again

« on: May 12, 2015, 10:30:30 PM »

I can attest that once I filed my bar complaint against Lauren Kingston of McCormack IP law, I never heard another peep from her.  My statute of limitations has since run out.

125

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Sample replies? Best course of action to take?

« on: May 11, 2015, 03:22:53 PM »

Since last September they had threatened to sue you in 90 days, they must be very busy if they wasted so much time before threatening to sue you again.  What are they busy doing?

Did you check out the law firm as Robert suggested?  Do they specialize in digital image law, or are they ambulance chasers?  If the latter, they are likely trolls and will not sue.  I would expect that since they are contacting you by email, they might be trolls because they can't be sure their email got through spam filters and the like.

Did you check out the picture registration personally?  Robert gives good advice when it comes down to these kinds of details.  Don't trust what they put it front of you.  Make sure it's registered.  And did you find where the writer sourced the picture?  If the photographer put the photo on a creative commons site, they will likely not sue you.

126

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty's image differs from the one they claim is an infringement

« on: April 23, 2015, 08:44:33 AM »

• Do not speak to them by phone.  Do everything in writing.  Use snail mail.
• You can do what your attorney suggests, but do not expect a response.  They really don't care what you say.  They are collectors operating under another name so as not to violate collections laws.
• If it were me, I would totally ignore them.  If your conscience will not let you do that the first time, write the letter your attorney suggests.  If they do not respond to each point you raise, ignore them henceforth.

127

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Extortion Letter received from LCS / Picscout

« on: April 15, 2015, 04:27:27 PM »

My reasons why you may want to ignore it:

• It is unlikely they will sue over 1 image.
• When you respond, they know they have a live one - until you respond, they know very little.  They are taking educated guesses at ways to get paid.  Your response tells them they have someone who might feel like they are on the hook to them.
• You think because they have contacted you that they know a lot about you.  But they know very little.  Part of this is phishing.  The response (whatever it is) helps them plot their strategy to extract money from you.
• When you respond, they know you have a conscience.  Remember, they do this for a living.  They know how to read people.  Your mailing address will tell them something about you.  Your email address will tell them something about you (no one here recommends using email - if you are going to respond, drag it out)
• How you respond tells them a lot about you.  You may feel you are justified.  They don't care.  They just wanna get paid
• What if you were in their shoes and you sent out multiple notices of infringement and heard nothing.  What would you think?  Are you barking up a dead alley?  Are you wasting your time?  Should you move on to lower hanging fruit?
• I played the response game with Getty.  I made it past my Statute of Limitations.  If I had it to do over again, I may have just been dead silent.  It would have saved me a lot of time.
• I responded because I thought my position was justified.  They really didn't care.  My response gave them more reasons to come at me.  They had found a live one.  They never listened to or negotiated anything in any of my responses.
• In short, my way worked, but with a 1 image infringement, I would just take the image down - and all others that might be infringing anyone's claims, and be silent.  Less effort for likely the same result
• Perhaps the most difficult part of this strategy is to quiet you conscience and stop trying to prove your case.  It should take a lot less time than playing the 3 year SOL game with communicating with them.

128

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Extortion Letter received from LCS / Picscout

« on: April 15, 2015, 08:43:15 AM »

Consider ignoring them.  I'll explain why later when I have more time.

129

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My Very Own DeBoer IP Extortion Letter from John M. DoBoer

« on: April 14, 2015, 04:07:59 PM »

Your website designer may be able to find where they got the image on www.Waybackmachine.org.  This internet archive preserves pages by date.  If they have an idea of when they found the image, this might help them find where.

I don't expect anyone is going to file a lawsuit over $1300.  If they do (your never know what others might try), it would be nice to be able to show a judge that you are not a habitual copyright infringer and that your hired help was duped by said site.

130

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Reached my SOL today but still going to Keep Fighting

« on: April 04, 2015, 07:54:47 PM »

From Getty Images, was born the antics of Timothy B. McCormack who would later go on to foolishly advise, encourage, and make himself involved to the embarrassing Chan v. Ellis appeal ordeal.  Getty Images has one more reason to be embarrassed about Timmy but I don't want to digress aside from the fact that he functions as the token pinata for ELI to beat on and mock (figuratively speaking, not literally, for the literary-challenged) when he does or says something foolish publicly. You know he is really disrespected when even a certain ELI lawyer makes the occasional "disapproving" public remark of Timmy B. McCormack.

To clarify, the Chan v. Ellis appeal ordeal was only embarrassing to Timothy B. McCormack and Linda Ellis.  I personally found it to be a source of pride and satisfaction that our legal process works in spite of the fact that certain ninnies are able to sneak through the bar exam process.

131

ELI Responses: Media Coverage of Chan v. Ellis Case / Re: Georgia Supreme Court hands unanimous win to Matthew Chan & ELI

« on: April 04, 2015, 10:16:00 AM »

Mulligan, let me concur in congratulating Matthew and his legal team and let me also applaud you for coining Timmy's new moniker.

The only problem I see is that to get Google to pick up on it correctly, we may have to write it as "Timothy B. McCormack aka Timothy "Boy, I Sure Screwed the Pooch and Revealed How Little I Know about Law When I Failed to Present a Rational Argument Before the George Supreme Court and Ended Up Looking and Sounding Like Daffy Duck Overdosing on Nitrous Oxide" McCormack."

132

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Reached my SOL today but still going to Keep Fighting

« on: March 31, 2015, 10:36:48 PM »

Congratulations Greg!

You rock!

Timothy B. McCormack not at all.

133

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I think my SOL was up yesterday

« on: March 27, 2015, 03:23:37 PM »

Congratulations, Doc!

My understanding is the SOL runs 3 years from the date they discover the issue.  Since that is impossible to know, using the letter date is extremely conservative.

You, my friend, are done with this BS.  Please feel free to stay connected with this community and to share anything you think might be of help to others that you may have previously felt uneasy about sharing.

134

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile v. Law Firm of Jerry Joseph Settled

« on: March 21, 2015, 09:05:26 AM »

You're welcome, Matt.

135

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile v. Law Firm of Jerry Joseph Settled

« on: March 20, 2015, 10:41:41 AM »

I agree with DavidVGoliath on the likely reasons for the settlement, but Jerry's off the wall idea should still be considered.  Stranger things have happened.

I think people should engage in the most creative thinking possible when formulating a strategy against these trolls.  That doesn't mean "go all-in tin foil hat" with 100% certainty, but just consider that there is an 80% likelihood that DVG's scenarios happened, but there might still be a 1-2% likelihood that Jerry's scenario happened.

Outside the box thinking is one of the reasons, Matthew has been so successful in leading the fight against trolls.