Messages

1576

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images and Complaints filed with the Washington State Attorney General

« on: July 28, 2012, 12:24:08 PM »

there will be much more than that I have a plan in the works, that will greatly depend on some of the ELI community..first things first however, is to complete wading thru these docs and culling out the fluff.

There will probably be a resulting thread of discussion of how and what to put into a powerful and damaging complaint letter.

1577

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images and Complaints filed with the Washington State Attorney General

« on: July 28, 2012, 07:07:35 AM »

oops sorry Scraggy, I have all of Israel (Picscout) blocked from my server..Thanks for the confirmation tho..you'll have to get the documents from the scribd library once we get them uploaded.

http://copyright-trolls.com/site/getty-images-public-record-complaints/

The link isn't working........

1578

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Possible reasons for class action suit against Getty in the USA

« on: July 28, 2012, 07:03:41 AM »

@Scraggy, your analogy with the car may very well be fraud, but if the car owners are too fearful, dumb, or lazy and just pay it, that's their problem. AS has been said numerous times someone has to stand up and make the fight, as you have apparently done in Israel. Without this it is a moot point.

I highly doubt Oscar has gotten a single letter concerning the collections you mention, if he had and the number was significant we would have heard of this and known of this. Just because he doesn't have time to post often, does not mean he is not in contact with ELI. I'm quite sure he would keep us in the loop.

To further back this up, I've been thru every complaint filed with Getty and there are no mentions of these colletions.

Brainstorming is perfectly fine, discussion is perfectly fine, but there comes a time when the issues get twisted and things start going south and it's all downhill from there, not everybody is going to agree on everything and sometimes it's best to agree to disagree. The beauty of this forum is the different personalities along with different points of view.

1579

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images and Complaints filed with the Washington State Attorney General

« on: July 27, 2012, 09:47:13 PM »

There are certainly some enlightening and entertaining complaints here. I suspect there will be enough fodder to comment on for weeks if not months... Just so happens I have some spare time to dedicate to this.

1580

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images and Complaints filed with the Washington State Attorney General

« on: July 27, 2012, 09:05:57 PM »

I think the main issue with this, is the fact that it is a telephone call, and would end up being a he said / she said thing...now if we were to get a letter where a paralegal does this, or better yet states somthing that translates into practicing law...that would a different story entirely....

Lots to go thru to say the least!

Hey guys I just found something very interesting in the first file that Robert has so graciously made available to us. When opened it is on page 114 of 233 and halfway down the letter in the paragraph starting on March 22, 2012 it states that the complainant Ms. Donna Misra after receiving a letter from Timothy McCormack she called his office to speak with him and ended up speaking with paralegal Susan Klatt. She states that Ms. Klatt demanded payment and also states and I quote "she threatened to file a lawsuit". Please correct me if I am wrong but that is a major no-no as a paralegal cannot threaten to sue on behalf of of the law offices they work for.

Perhaps Ms. Misra should be added to our possible contact list as to me this looks like one that should go to the Wyoming, Oregon and Idaho State Bar associations against Timmy.

I will continue to post things of interest as I find them especially for possible follow-up contact with the complainant.

1581

Getty Images Letter Forum / Getty Images and Complaints filed with the Washington State Attorney General

« on: July 27, 2012, 06:37:25 PM »

At long last I have in my possession the CD containing the complaints that have been filed with the AG. We will have these uploaded to the scribd account, as well as a culled version at some point in time..

http://copyright-trolls.com/site/getty-images-public-record-complaints/

1582

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another Victim

« on: July 27, 2012, 12:30:30 PM »

I read your article and you are a fool if you pay this for several reasons.

1. Getty may not even own this image! Have they shown you proof?
2. IF they own the image it may not be properly registered, thus lowering any amount they would be able to collect IF it went to court.
3. It sounds as if you may have used this image to create a "parody" of sorts. If this is true you may be covered by "Fair Use".
4 By rolling over and paying just re-enforces Getty to continue on trolling and targeting innocent infringers such as yourself.
5. Have you researched the image in question? Is it available from other sources?
6. Just because Getty pulls a random amount out of thin air, does not mean the images is worth what they are stating..

I could go on and on here...do you still want to pay?

1583

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Possible reasons for class action suit against Getty in the USA

« on: July 27, 2012, 07:37:06 AM »

I'm really looking to moving on here, and not have anybody's panties in a knot, we're all on the same team!
So I will cut to the chase and answer Scraggy's questions..

"Approximately, 5% of the images involved the "Dorling Kindersley" or "National Geographic" collections.
Until you mentioned these collections, I have NEVER even heard of them.
How many people in the USA have paid Getty a settlement for images from these two collections?
None that we had heard of.
Oscar may have a statistical sample of letters on which to base an estimate?
He's a Lawyer not a statistician!
If it is a statistically significant number, is this a possible class action suit?
Probably not at this time
Are there other collections similar in nature to these two?
They have many collections, but i'm not researching it.

"My main question: Is Getty also sending demand letters in the USA for the two collections mentioned above?
Not to my knowledge

If so, wouldn’t this be outright fraud?"
Perhaps, but Getty RARELY files suit, are you going to sue them for fraud for sending a demand letter??

While I agree that it is important to have the "Legal Discussions" and quoting law, ect, the simple truth of the matter is that until Getty starts filing suits left and right over single images, it's all moot, when and if this starts happening I'll be more than happy to jump on the bandwagon.

1584

Getty Images Letter Forum / Attorney Cindy Hsu no longer associated with Carolyn Wright?

« on: July 26, 2012, 09:21:50 PM »

You may remember Cindy, as she had the distinction of sending out one of , if not the highest amount demand letters on behalf of photoattorney.com Carolyn Wright.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/photo-attorney-carolyn-e-wright-$35k-settlement-demand-letter/

By all indications it would appear and I believe that Atlanta Attorney Cindy Hsu is no longer associated with Wright's law firm. According to the Georgia Bar Assc site it has her address listed as Tokyo, Japan. It seems her site is still up and available, showing a Greenville NC address. I am currently working to dig out more info on this.

I'd like to think ( but can't confirm) that her departure may have had something to do with the exposure ELI freely gave her and her demand letter.. The same holds true for our Canadian friend Julie Stewart.. Although this may not be the change we are all working towards, I see it as a change nonetheless.

1585

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Possible reasons for class action suit against Getty in the USA

« on: July 26, 2012, 05:51:28 PM »

Try as I might to stay away from this debate, now that our cult leader has spoken I feel obligated to chime in as an ELI Defense Team Member ( I love my title and benefits BTW)

While I find this topic interesting I tend to side with MC, we're just not to that point yet, not to mention it is very complicated law and I'm not a lawyer, nor do i want to be. I'm not going to spend my time attempting to decipher all of the legal aspects at this time..Not to say that if a class action became something viable to present I wouldn't , because at that time i would more than likely be willing to learn the ropes as it were.

Yes sometimes we need to agree to disagree and let it go at that, part of the beauty that is ELI is the different opinions, angels and thought processes. As Matthew stated "Copyright extortion: Bad. Fight and Spank back: Good."

Every single one of us has a place in ELI in terms of fighting back, and I have respect for every single person that contributes....Well except for Uncle Glen Carner from Hawaiian Art Network.

and now my admission of guilt...see I just tied Glen Carner who works with Vincent K Tylor from Hawaiian Art Network and Copyright Services International to a thread dealing with a Class Action Lawsuit.

Another FREE google entry! 

1586

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Has anyone in the UK settled?

« on: July 26, 2012, 10:34:35 AM »

see my comments in the quoted portion of this in bold type.

My client is in the same situation as yourself. I have sent letters to Atradius to get them to answer some very basic questions are they always seem to avoid reaching the point i am asking. This is their last reponse from 23rd July in which i sent them two letters asking the questions below:

We have already answered you queries however to avoid any further questions please note below.
 
1.   Getty’s legal bond/proof of rights instruction with the image owner to recover any infringement charges.
 
This is clearly covered in the letters sent and is covered under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Not the case if they did not supply you the terms of the agreement betwqeen the photog and getty.
 
2.   Image owner to provide exclusive copyright details of the image.
 
Our clients images are encoded with a marker which is identifiable with their software, When their images are located the details are cross referenced against their database of clients and if there is not a match a letter is sent to the websites owner. Hence we can prove the image you used belongs to Getty Images.

Highly doubtful that the image is encoded with "a marker", Getty owns picscout, which hits on similar images, they then cross refernce it
 
3.   Explanation and breakdown as to how the amount of £574.75 was calculated as a legal charge.
 
The charge made is for an infringement. There is no breakdown. You have used our clients image without obtaining the rights and therefore are being invoiced as they deem fit. You may wish to refer to a case earlier this year HOFFMAN v DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (UK) LTD for clarification of charges being made and awarded.

the above referenced case really does not apply to this..for several reasons. 1. The image in question in your clients claim, may or may not be properly reistered.
2. Getty may or may not have the exclusive license to this image.
3. The artist in question may not even be affiliated with Getty images any longer
4. this could be deemed an "innocent infringement" which would drastically reduce the amount getty could collect, if anything at all!

The above referenced case is being used as a scare tactic, and it shows the worst possible outcome, this is by design, to make your client more likely to pay.

here they are deeming you guilty, the image in question may very well be available elsewhere, this collection agency is not judge and jury..This "charge" is not a charge at all but a "claim" totally different beasts.
 
4.   If Getty Images are exclusive licensees for this image, then please provide license.
 
If you wish to use the image legally then you must first pay the settlement requested for using the image without authorisation. You can then be supplied with a figure for use of the image once details of the image use have been taken.

They completely avoided this question, because they know as well as getty knows, they may NOT have an exclusive license.
 
As we have fully responded to each point you have raised please confirm that payment of the £574.75 will be made immediately. If payment is not made we will have no option but to pursue the end user for the amount whereby court action will be taken if payment is not received.
----
You might want to look into the UK laws in regards to a collection agency, threatening a suit, I doubt they have the right to do this on Getty's behalf. I would also look into possibly reporting this agency for unfair / strong arm tactics...again you'll need to research this, before jumping the gun.

Question 4 is the question which i think they deliberately avoided answering. I am now going to wait and see how long it takes for them to send my client another letter. They have given deadlines firstly of 14days, then 5 days so will see what case they have and if they send any other threating letters.

Chances are good they have no "case"

1587

P2P/BitTorrent Lawsuits Forum / Re: Another Small Victory in the Malibu Media Lawsuits

« on: July 26, 2012, 06:57:55 AM »

we've been seeing more of this as of late, I agree with Matthew that it is not the intent of the trolls to follow thru on these suits, but to use them as leverage to obtain names and then settle quickly. Most certainly a huge blow to their scheme. It really boils down abuse of the system.

1588

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Has anyone in the UK settled?

« on: July 25, 2012, 06:58:33 PM »

I think it would be in your best interest to NOT ASSUME it is 6 yrs.. if it is only three you are almost home free..it should not be hard to find and the answer is most likely right in these forums. We're willing to help, but you have to be willing to do some of the homework as well.. I'm hoping another UK poster will chime in with the answer, bu t I know for a fact that this collection agency just came to our attention recently and I also know there was some discussion..you might want to start there and see if anyone chimes in with the statute..

1589

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Has anyone in the UK settled?

« on: July 25, 2012, 06:28:39 PM »

This collection Agency has no right to attempt to collect on a "claim", you  will have to research how this works in the UK, but i'm sure it is not ethical and probably not legal..search this forum for other threads related to this collection agency, you might find your answer...Once you get them to return the claim to Getty, they will be off your back.. I don't know what the statute of limitations is in the UK, but here it is 3 years, which you are nearing..if it is the same in the UK, you could easily go back and forth with Getty for the remainder of the statute at which point it passes you can politely tell them to pound salt...you'd be in the clear then..

1590

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Heres your Saturday snicker!!

« on: July 25, 2012, 01:38:36 PM »

I think the diversity of opinion in the forum is a subject that could also be discussed in TEF. We had Uncle Glen contributing HIS opinion. That was interesting.

I wonder what he's up to these days. We haven't heard much from new HAN letter recipients lately.

That may be a good discussion for TEF, and I agree it's part of what makes ELI great..

as for Glen Carners opinions he was sharing..all I can say is "opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one and sometimes they stink!"

I know where he's been....he's been up to his ass in lawsuit, if he loses this he may very well go out of business.