| 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.
The letter came from the U.S. Seattle WA. The only thing Canadian related is if I choose to do a bank transfer it requests it be sent to the Bank of America located in Toronto Ontario, otherwise it's mail a cheque to Seattle.
The one I received 3 years ago in November was not certified. Sending certified letters would probably cost Getty too much.
They have no copyright on this image. Unless they made transformative alterations to the underlying work, the image is not theirs to claim.
Based on what you said so far, my reply would be simple:
The image is in the public domain. Not realizing this at the time, you purchased a license from their affiliated company, iStock photo for a few dollars. If they pester you again with further requests for documentation, they must provide a chain of title showing how they have the exclusive rights to this image. If they do continue to ask for further clarification you will provide it. However you charge $200 an hour for this service and bill in half hour increments. You will submit an invoice for any further time they cause you to spend on this issue.
Done.
===original letter=====
License Compliance Services, Science Photo Library Ltd.
605 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104
United States
"The de minimis doctrine is rarely discussed in copyright opinions because suits are rarely brought over trivial instances of copying. Nonetheless, it is an important aspect of the law of copyright. Trivial copying is a significant part of modern life. Most honest citizens in the modern world frequently engage, without hesitation, in trivial copying that, but for the de minimis doctrine, would technically constitute a violation of law. We do not hesitate to make a photocopy of a letter from a friend to show to another friend, or of a favorite cartoon to post on the refrigerator. Parents in Central Park photograph their children perched on Jose de Creeft's Alice in Wonderland sculpture. We record television programs aired while we are out, so as to watch them at a more convenient hour. 8 Waiters at a restaurant sing "Happy Birthday" at a patron's table. When we do such things, it is not that we are breaking the law but unlikely to be sued given the high cost of litigation. Because of the de minimis doctrine, in trivial instances of copying, we are in fact not breaking the law. If a copyright owner were to sue the makers of trivial copies, judgment would be for the defendants. The case would be dismissed because trivial copying is not an infringement."
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. |
