Messages

1471

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Judge: Facebook "Like" button doesn't count as "Free Speech"

« on: May 04, 2012, 05:40:28 PM »

Who am I to delete the "v" word when I am spouting off with other 4-letter words?  It isn't like you used the "c" word or the "p" word in place of the "v" word.   LOL.

This does not surprise me, coming from Virginia, home of the Vaginal Probe law.. thats all I'll say, cause I really just felt a need to say "Vaginal Probe"...there I said it twice to make sure it's out of my system...Feel free to delete this post Matt, as this might just cross the line or something. 

1472

Getty Images Letter Forum / Rant: Stupid & lazy people should pay Getty Images full fare

« on: May 04, 2012, 03:34:06 PM »

Incoming Phone call from a number I don't recognize.  Normally, I don't pick up the phone with unknown phone number. Unfortunately, I thought someone else I knew was trying to contact me. So I stupidly pick up the phone.

Him: "Um, I am not sure I am reaching the right person. Are you the Matthew Chan with the Getty...."

I cut him off and say "Yes, I am."

Him: "Is this a scam?"

Me: "No, it's not a scam."

Him: "That means I have to pay $2,500?"

Me: "No, I didn't say you have to pay. I said it wasn't a scam. You need to get educated. Go visit extortionletterinfo.com. Lots of free information on my website."

Him with a confused voice: "All I want to know is do I have to pay or not pay?" 

(I desperately restrain myself from saying, "Go pay the damned invoice if you are too stupid to hear what I am saying or too lazy to go visit extortionletterinfo.com.")

Me: "I don't take these kinds of calls. I get these types of calls all the time. Go get educated and visit extortionletterinfo.com."

Him:  Tries to say something but I am not listening.

Me: I am not talking anymore about this. Go visit extortionletterinfo.com. Lots of good information there. Click. (I impatiently and annoyingly hang up on him as he is babbling about something.)

Another Punishing Reminder for Matthew: DON'T PICK UP THE FUCKING PHONE WHEN YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE THE NUMBER! IF IT'S IMPORTANT, SOMEONE WILL LEAVE A VOICEMAIL."

I need to modify my original Getty Images blog posts from 2008 and explicitly say "DON'T CALL ME!" I might even do a 5-second video telling people I won't blindly take their calls. I have links to ExtortionLetterInfo.com but apparently that isn't enough.

I normally don't root for the other side. But in some cases, if you are too lazy to get educated, you deserve to lose your money to Getty Images. Nearly 4 years of people calling me out of the blue without first visiting ELI has made me very cranky.

1473

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....

« on: May 04, 2012, 01:44:51 PM »

The Jonathan Klein videos I posted include the two TechCrunch videos posted on YouTube at the very bottom. 

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/jonathan-klein-chief-executive-hypocrite-bullshitter-of-getty-images/

I sorted the videos in chronological order although the "best one" is the very last one discussing Intellectual Property.

1474

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Lisa Willmer of Getty Images in 2009 Los Angeles Times Article

« on: May 04, 2012, 01:30:44 PM »

At the late hour I posted that statistic, my mind was playing with all the possible calculation variables.  It is very hard to say if 50% pays up. I would say that it could be a bit lower if what ELI is doing makes an impact in the awareness department.

No matter how you cut it, it is a multi-million dollar revenue operation.

Think of the salaries you have to pay these staff lawyers:

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/getty-images-corporate-counsel-staff-found-on-linkedin/

I am guessing the 5 staff lawyers I found average $95K/year including benefits. That is about half-million per year NOT including their paralegals and their collection clerks.

It is interesting to play with the numbers.

1475

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 04, 2012, 03:28:15 AM »

What I said is to not ignore it.  At the same time, that doesn't mean debating and writing them back and forth every month for the next 3 years either.

Let me clarify. I don't have a set number but my own experience says 3-4 responses is probably enough. IN my case, I was "lucky" enough to respond only twice before Getty Images left me alone.  If they had escalated it to a collection agency or attorney, I would NOT have ignored them. I would have responded to them a couple of times before stopping as well.

@Matthew: but I've read from you a few times that you don't think it is wise to ignore the charges all together. It really comes down to, then, the character of the first (and potentially only) reply.

1476

Getty Images Letter Forum / Getty Images Corporate Counsel Staff Found on LinkedIn

« on: May 04, 2012, 03:11:31 AM »

I was originally doing some digging on Lisa Willmer and stumbled across her LinkedIn profile. 

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lisa-willmer/a/a7b/b47

And what do I find in doing that? Several other Getty Images employee names who work in the Extortion oops, Corporate Counsel Department.

In no particular order, I am capturing these names for others to follow-up. All of these individuals are lawyers in good standing but might be vulnerable to complaints to the State Bar should they cross the line. For the most part, extortion letter recipients don't hear from these folks. They tend to (wisely) work quietly in the background letting the extortion collection clerks deal with the masses. But they also let outside lawyers like Timothy B. McCormack take the arrows.  After all, he is disposable to Getty Images.

Once Timothy B. McCormack outlives his usefulness, there are thousands of other lawyers able to take his place.
http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=28074

Let me make it clear that I don't condone anyone trivially filing State Bar complaints on any lawyer as it can be damaging to their careers and reputation. But having said that, if any lawyer came after me unreasonably, I would not hesitate to do it. I absolutely believe in personal payback especially where unreasonable, bullying lawyers are concerned.

Yoko Miyashita (VP, Seattle)
http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=32023

Lizanne Vaughan (Senior Director, Seattle)
http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=25966

Lisa Willmer (Senior Director, Seattle)
http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=31310

Ilana Safer (Director, NYC)
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/attorney/AttorneyDetails?attorneyId=5641510

Jason Camhi (NYC)
http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/attorney/AttorneyDetails?attorneyId=5526641

Jonathan Lockwood (VP, UK)
Irene Paricaud (Director, UK)
Alec Cameron (Director, UK)

These are what I would consider "management" or "supervisory" positions who probably oversee and advise the hourly interns / extortion collection clerks. I cannot confirm this. This is only an educated guess based on what I have seen. I did not include the names of a couple of paralegals who work at Getty Images. I am guessing they are not part of the extortion collections team.

They all seem to work under the umbrella of John Lapham (Seattle), Senior Vice_President of General Counsel.
http://www.mywsba.org/default.aspx?tabid=178&RedirectTabId=177&Usr_ID=23254

1477

Getty Images Letter Forum / Lisa Willmer of Getty Images in 2009 Los Angeles Times Article

« on: May 04, 2012, 02:28:08 AM »

I am not sure why I never caught some of the goodies in this news article over two years ago. But in looking up Lisa Willmer, Senior Director of Corporate Counsel at Getty Images (who also oversees and hires hourly interns and collection clerks), I found this 2009 Los Angeles Times Article.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/13/business/fi-lazarus13

Lisa Willmer also happens to be the person Oscar Michelen has interacted and communicated with at Getty Images.

Check this out:

Getty says it finds about 42,000 examples of copyright infringement a year. For its part, Corbis says it uncovers about 70,000 violations annually.

Those are some huge numbers! That Picscout scoutbot really works hard to find these alleged infringements.

I have always said that there were "thousands of letters" going out each year but never quite certain where the actual numbers might be. Oscar once speculated a while back that there could be 100,000 letters issued over the years. It turns out Oscar's rough estimate was right.

Assuming Getty Images issues extortion letters to "only" 25% those alleged infringements, that is an easy 10,000 extortion letters per year (or 800 extortion letters/month)! If they issue extortion letters to 50% of those alleged infringements, that is 20,000 extortion letters per year (or 1,600 extortion letters/month)!

Remember, those were 2009 numbers.  Those numbers might have increased in the last 3 years since that story was published. No wonder Getty Images salivates over the extortion letter program and invests so much resources into the program.

1478

Getty Images Letter Forum / Jonathan Klein: Chief Executive Hypocrite & Bullshitter of Getty Images

« on: May 04, 2012, 01:48:08 AM »

Jonathan Klein, the so-called CEO of Getty Images is probably the biggest hypocrite at Getty Images. Letter recipients can only laugh and mock him when they listen to him spout off.

Jonathan Klein at MIDEM 2010 (Sep. 16, 2010)


He says:  Be willing to examine your business model. Don't get obsessed with piracy. Be open to change. Be willing to cannibalize yourself. He talks about undue influence, pressure, and control over talent. How many times does he use the word "model"?

Jonathan Klein at MidemNet 2010 (Sept. 2010) Up to 2:40, then jump to 5:55.


He says: Can't be too precious, don't be too proud. 40,000 images/week is uploaded in iStockPhoto & every image is inspected and legally appropriate.

Jonathan Klein's Interview with Financial Times (Aug. 26, 2011)


He says: Getty pays heavy dividends to its private equity investor.

Jonathan Klein at SXSW: TechCrunch Interview (March 2012)


Loves to spout off about revenue model and monetization.

Jonathan Klein at SXSW on Intellectual Property: TechCrunch Interview (March 2012)


The best video saved for last.  Biggest pile of doo-doo spoken here. The entire video should make your eyes roll.

The accompanying TechCrunch article to the "Intellectual Property" video is here:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/22/for-pinterest-revenue-will-turn-copyright-questions-into-problems/

1479

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 04, 2012, 12:22:08 AM »

Agreed.  It makes my eyes roll when people say they will continue to reply as much as necessary for 3 years until the statute of limitations runs out.

At some point, you have to make a stand (after covering yourself doing the the requisite due diligence, of course)

Debating back and forth with collection clerks endlessly is a waste of time here.  People keep forgetting they are dealing with peons who really have no real authority.

This is quite correct, Peeved.
However, it appears to me that most folks seem quite compelled to write to Getty and argue their position.
So, if people want to write, my advice is to keep it to the minimum that I mentioned, and leave it at that.
That is, leave it at the point wherein they refuse to provide proof of their allegations and/or refuse a reasonable settlement.

S.G.

1480

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:44:36 PM »

It certainly doesn't hurt. I say go for it.

I'm wonder if it makes sense to include this line at the bottom of my reply "This email is sent pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 408."

From what I can tell, there is nothing in my letter which would hurt my case should it ever get to a court, and more likely, the content in it which would help establish that I made a reasonable reply and good-faith effort to their initial letter.

What do you think?

1481

Getty Images Letter Forum / Getty Images Disgruntled Employee or Insider is Gold!

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:42:39 PM »

Wow, you read my mind. I was thinking to myself that it would really be gold for an "insider",  "whistle-blower", or disgruntled employee to approach ELI to share their story of how it looks from the "inside".

I normally don't go out of my way to speak to people I don't know, about ELI-related matters anymore unless they make an ELI Contribution or someone has very significant information.

I would roll out the red carpet to hear from a disgruntled Getty employee or other insider. I am hopeful one day someone will step forward.

Matt, I'm looking forward to the day one of those interns gets fed up with being a copyright troll who is making so many lives miserable.

On that day, I hope that person will come to ELI and provide all the dirty details about what has to be a totally awful and spiritually deadening job.

I can't even imagine how I could look myself in the mirror every morning knowing that I was going to spend the next eight hours lying to people and doing everything I could to try extract exorbitant payments from them for, in so many cases, frivolous images worth less than $2.00 on the open market.

1482

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Removing images from web page, hard drive and archive.org??

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:36:11 PM »

I also have an elderly mother that can be a challenge to explain things to especially when they are ruled by fear. In these situations, it is best to take the path of least resistance. Hiring Oscar is the best thing you can do.  If you hired another lawyer, I promise you it would be a more painful process. I have been working with Oscar for nearly 4 years and I promise you, I would not attach my photo with his if we weren't tag-teaming how we help people.  We have a multi-pronged strategy that has been quite potent to the regrets of some of the copyright troll attorneys.

I feel the stress and pain of your situation. Believe me when I tell you that I don't say that often. Your situation definitely resonates with me.

Matt, you summed it up perfectly.  The site I took down was a simple 7-page static website promoting my mom's single-employee (her) beauty salon.  It showed a price list, services offered, and a map showing potential clients how to get there.  Did I want to take it down?  Of course not.  However, I cannot allow Getty to continue harassing my mother any further, since she is their perfect target who would have just paid them what they asked for without first educating herself on what they're really doing.  Therefore, I've hired Oscar to intercept their communication going forward, and on her request, wanted to simply remove all history of the site to help her mental state going forward.  It's what is currently helping her sleep at night, and I pray Oscar sends them his letter before they send her the next one - I can't go through another week of her instability in thinking she's done something wrong.

If they were harassing ME, however, I would have certainly left the site archived.  It really all depends what helps you get through this, mentally.

1483

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Think this letter will stop their harassment?

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:28:27 PM »

Lettered,

You are so funny with your disclaimers. You have been here long enough to know that no one on the ELI Forums is a lawyer with the exception of Oscar. But that doesn't stop the rest of us from putting a "butt-hurt" (per SG) on the stock photo industry.

No need for your disclaimers anymore!  LOL.

and my standard disclaimer: Im not a lawyer and anything I write here is just my layman's understanding.

1484

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Think this letter will stop their harassment?

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:25:20 PM »

I don't think I could make it any simpler than this outline here.

I'll jump in! ( I'm not a lawyer) but I'll be as clear as possible here.. There are precisely 2 ways to stop them from harassing you.

1. pay them ( either the full amount or a reduced amount)
2. hire Oscar or another attorney. ( then they are bound by law to harass your attorney)

Regardless of what you write, they will respond, they will ignore any requests for documentation.

You cannot and will not be able to out lawyer them, your letters will land on the desk of a college intern who drinks to much corporate kool-aid and is trained to only respond with the corporate line of BS. At some point it will get escalted to possibly another troll for more of the same.

If you do not have it in you to go back and forth for them for 3 years, simply hire Oscar to draft you a letter on your behalf and be done with it. Citing law, this , that and the other thing is fruitless IMHO

1485

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Think this letter will stop their harassment?

« on: May 03, 2012, 08:24:05 PM »

Stinger,

You might be a newbie but I do think you "get it".  Thanks for that. Sometimes I feel we are spinning our wheels on the forums trying to get people to "get it".

I don't even want to respond to certain types of posts anymore. I don't have the stomach for it.

Andrew, I am as much a newbie at this as you.  And I would say that what you propose sounds good to me in terms of two guys going at it out in the playground.

However, when I step back from the situation, I think "Do you really want to quote the law to a law firm?"  That kind of seems like your letting them do battle with you in their arena.  Not that it wouldn't be fun to beat them in their own arena, but why go through all that trouble?

A simpler solution might be to let them know that you are a turnip that they will not be able to squeeze any blood out of.  Or, you can let them know that they are going to have to work hard and even then, there might not be any blood for them to squeeze out of this turnip.

Get your ego out of the way, and get out of this as simply as you can.  I know that's hard to do.  I have trouble doing it.  What getty does makes my blood boil.  And when my blood boils, I want to hurt them.  But in the end, it's the prudent solution.