Messages

181

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona

« on: March 31, 2018, 04:29:29 AM »

The one thing about the whole Nick Youngson / RM Media that really irks me is how this guy in the UK is rattling so many cages here in the US with his honeypot strategies from afar. This guy is really asking for it. And the Higbee operation inciting people with some of these outrageous demands.

They are going to hit the wrong defendant one day, and then Nick Youngson and/or the Higbee operation will be on the receiving end of some pain and angst.  Karma can be a real bitch.

We have seen so many copyright extortionists fall, leave the business, or become diminished over the years because the backlash and unintended consequences of their actions took its toll.

All I can say is "they are asking for it". But more than likely, their greed glands pulse too much.  They want the money at all costs.

182

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Mathew Higbee of Higbee & Associates Bullshits People about "National Law Firm"

« on: March 31, 2018, 04:19:49 AM »

I am not endorsing this but as a matter of practicality, passion, and effectiveness, people tend to stay away from those who are able to "go there" and attack/retaliate back very hard.

I don't necessarily have to agree with your position to see how very effective this would be.  Sometimes, you don't have to be right. Sometimes, you have to get mean, tough, and vicious to get people to back off. I've had to take that approach a few times in my life. It gets ugly but it often works.

This is why the ELI Forums exist and hosted primarily by non-lawyers. We can have these nitty-gritty discussions that would make most people and lawyers cringe. Some lawyers may secretly agree with your tact but they could never publicly or recommend it.

I will admit that my earlier years on ELI, I took a much more aggressive, meaner, and more vicious tact and tone in telling people to fight back. I read your post and the tone of it reminded me of ME several years ago.

I do believe sometimes it requires a certain meanness, viciousness, and ruthlessness as a response if people refuse to be reasonable. I don't prefer that as a first-response but it never hurts to have that in your back pocket.

I cannot endorse your tact but I can certainly appreciate and understand its effectiveness.  Every person can read the public discussion and make their own decisions on how to handle their cases.

And the right thing to combat it is to call the photographer out and make their lives so miserable for contacting you (pointing out that you're onto this seeding trend) that they never dream of contacting anyone again over their mediocre basically worthless image that they think is so damn valuable.  Worked for me.

183

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: New Higbee / RM Media / Nick Youngson case filed in Arizona

« on: March 29, 2018, 01:00:32 AM »

Thanks for sharing. That is a clever away of sharing documents here.

Here is a link to the pertinent docs, and here is the link written out:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g2lofs7x9395mq3/AACUt33-s6jpbUYTQP0cYV3za?dl=0

184

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another Peter Holt Shakedown

« on: March 27, 2018, 11:12:26 PM »

The dude has to make a living somehow, right?   

That asshole Peter Holt doesn't like to be associated with "extortion", go read this very old thread, he got his panties in a knot when phrases such as "Attorney Peter Holt sends extortion letter" , Peter Holt Practices Extortion" and the like when we discussed him on ELI, he seemingly doesn't like any of us to post our opinions that he is a copyright troll, practicing legalized extortion...We haven't heard a peep from Peter Holt or his firm in a very long time, now all of a sudden he has chosen to step back into this arena.....

https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/attorney-peter-t-holt's-letter-to-oscar-michelen-eli-website/msg3763/#msg3763

185

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another Peter Holt Shakedown

« on: March 27, 2018, 11:11:02 PM »

Are you planning on going to court over this? Lawsuits on small-time infringements are actually pretty rare.

Section 1203 of the The Digital Millennium Copyright Act states: "The court has discretion to reduce or remit damages in cases of innocent violations, where the violator proves that it was not aware and had no reason to believe its acts constituted a violation." [Section 1203(c)(5)(A)].

186

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another Peter Holt Shakedown

« on: March 27, 2018, 11:08:51 PM »

That is generally a bad assumption. There are many pirate sites out there that put up "free wallpaper" websites. In my view, if you see that, RUN AWAY FAST!  Which website did you get the image from? Was it his website?

It's curious that the photographer, Michael Briner, placed his images on these free photo download websites if he doesn't want people to download and use them.

187

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another Peter Holt Shakedown

« on: March 27, 2018, 11:05:58 PM »

My comments inline...

I received a threatening "Settlement Demand Letter" about the "copyright infringement" of a Michael Briner photograph from attorney Peter Holt in Folsom CA. His letter, in so many words, said I could be liable to pay $30,000-$150,000, but if I pay him $1672, he will let me off the hook.

Peter is so sweet and generous to give up the other $28,000 to $148,000 that he could have gotten, right?  LOL.

I got the photo from one of many free photo image download websites. After a 15-minute web search recently, I found the picture on several of these. There are undoubtedly many more. The copyright symbol had been removed from all the copies and there were no restrictions stated on the download page. I have screen captures and web addresses of all of these pages. So, the download of the photo was in good faith because there was no indication that the image was copyrighted. Also, it was on a third party website that posted the image and built it's site using that picture. Of course, I removed the picture from my website immediately.

You need a wake up call and you may have to learn the hard way.  Piracy is rampant. That is what you are seeing. And whether there is a copyright symbol or not, all images are owned by someone. If ain't you, then that should automatically give you pause.

I realize this is a form of entrapment where the photographer places his photos on free wallpaper and image sites, then uses an application like PicScout or TinEye to scan the internet for the image. He then works with an attorney to send out a "Settlement Demand Letter" to "coercively extract" money from the unwitting victim with fear-inducing tactics.

No, it is not always entrapment. There are some cases where there is "baiting". But many of these "free wallpaper" websites pirate images from legitimate artists/owners and then lure people in for the web traffic. Without knowing the websites you are referring to, it is hard to say. More than likely it was a pirate who launched these "free wallpaper websites".

Any suggestions for the best way to proceed from here?

That is too broad a question.  If you want to negotiate and settle, there is a set of strategies.  If you want to avoiding paying/settling, that is another strategy. It comes with its own set of risks.What do YOU think you want to do?

188

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee Hired by Getty/AFP?

« on: March 27, 2018, 10:52:23 PM »

When the settlement was $153, you were not "concerned". But because they asked for more, you are now concerned?  How are the "facts" of the case any different? Facts of the case don't change regardless of how much they are asking or who is representing the case. And your defense argument shouldn't change just because the demand increased.

If you want to try to communicate with Picrights, nothing is stopping you from doing so.

Without knowing more, you give me the impression that you had a "defense" argument but not something you are really committed to.  I don't get the feeling you really wanted to settle to begin with.

If you want to settle now, then you will likely have to get smart and then negotiate hard to reduce it. If you are unable or unwilling to negotiate hard, then you can just go dark or bite the bullet and pony up. Negotiating hard means to stand your ground if a reasonable amount is not offered.

I have to say that a $153 settlement is very low amount. I am not saying people should automatically settle and pay but the fact that you dragged your feet, you now have extra work on your hands to negotiate it back down.

Honestly, I don't think there will be a lawsuit especially if you are a small party. AFP tends to go after bigger parties. The fact that they offered $153 as a settlement means they believe you were a "small" infringer. I must tell you, $153 is a heck of a settlement offer.

And Pic Rights likely did not hand off the case to Higbee overnight. You had your chance to jump on the $153 settlement but you sat on it thinking it would go away. It clearly didn't.

In November of 2017 I received an email from Geoff Beal with Pic Rights on behalf of Agence France-Presse. I wrote back claiming lack of proof of interest/ownership since the copyright was for Getty images and attributed to an individual. In addition the blog was a personal use/commentary blog that earns me ZERO income, so I also claimed Fair Use.  I also was hesitant sending money to a company in a different Country. I didn't hear anything until today so I thought I was golden. Now it appears that Higbee and Associates is their US Counsel. I've read all the posts thus far on Higbee. They are now demanding $948 which is the $153 originally requested from Pic Rights coupled with now attorney fees. It wasn't immediately obvious it was the same photo/same client until you go to the client portal. The actual email letter doesn't reference a client at all nor a specific photo. It's the same photo and now the client (once you go to the pay button) is Marion Bigot. This photo in NO way is accredit to a Marion Bigot. If you Google this lady she works for AFP. If you're wondering why I didn't pay the $153 because it struck me as odd to send money to a foreign corporation and I hate these extortion people. I am concerned about this much higher number. I went back to the original "payment" button for the $153.00 claim from Pick Rights but it has now boosted to the same $948.00. Should I attempt to negotiate with attorneys  office or offer to perhaps pay Pics Right people $200 to go away? How for real are this Higbee dudes? Happy to share more.

189

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Prepared Food Photos - Small Claims Court

« on: March 27, 2018, 03:18:30 PM »

This is very unusual and highly unorthodox. In the 10 years of ELI's existence, I don't think we have ever heard of anyone going through small claims court on anything infringement related. This seems like a "creative" strategy/tactic. Do you have the paperwork on this?

The ELI team would very much like to see the paperwork if you are willing to share it with us. 

You can email it to me privately at matt30060 / gmail.

Has anyone run into this new method of attack? Adlife is now taking people to Small Claims Court in an attempt to extort money out of them.  They are claiming that I stole use of their subscription site and feel that as a result I should pay several months of their overpriced subscription fee as compensation for one photo.  I have never even heard of this site prior to being sued let alone ever downloaded any photos from it.  Has this happened to anyone else on the forum?  I am interested to know if your small claims date has already occurred? What was the outcome. Did they show up? Was it Rebecca who is an employee of Adlife and works with Albrizio. I am being harassed in the same manner and it would be helpful to know if you went to court what the outcome was. I am curious if they prevailed or if the Magistrate saw them for what they are? Did they file with the plaintiff being Prepared Food Photo’s .com?. Any info anyone can share would be greatly appreciated. I would prefer not to list my name as I am currently involved in an open claim against my company. Does anyone have any advice as to how to stop this sort of unfair business practice.

190

Legal Controversies Forum / MOVED: Another Peter Holt Shakedown

« on: March 24, 2018, 08:14:30 PM »

This topic has been moved to Getty Images Letter Forum.

https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/index.php?topic=4685.0

191

Legal Controversies Forum / MOVED: Copytrack email and letter

« on: March 24, 2018, 08:14:09 PM »

This topic has been moved to Getty Images Letter Forum.

https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/index.php?topic=4647.0

192

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copytrack chasing me

« on: March 21, 2018, 05:03:04 AM »

Jren,

I have read a few of your posts. I am not convinced your breadth of knowledge or understanding of what truly goes on and some of the nuances being discussed here.

First, if you equate infringement (even if it is wilful) to criminal theft, you clearly don't get that this is a CIVIL matter, not a criminal matter. You can conflate "stealing" and "infringing" as one and the same but they are not, NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Second, even if there is a willful infringement (which most infringements are not), it does not give the right to party to arbitrarily and unjustifiably demand and collect any amount of money.

Third, we discuss defense strategies of all kinds.  Some involve mutually agreed negotiated settlements, others do not.

Fourth, there is vanilla unregistered copyright and then there is registered copyright that determines damages. There is also the issue of market value.  If you think infringing upon a $10 unregistered image justifies paying thousands of dollars on the basis of someone's say-so is the "right" to do, then you get to pay the price for your ignorance.

But please don't come here on this forum and make sweeping value statements about readers that visit to this website to get educated and try to insinuate they are ethically or morally challenged. If you felt you infringed on an image and you deserved to pay a settlement because of your "theft", that is your call.

Some people should settle, other people shouldn't. It depends. It strikes me as odd that you came onto the ELI Forums looking for information and strategies but perhaps you didn't find a strategy you liked and you chose to dispose of the matter, suddenly you want to make these subtle snide remarks against others who have the ability and emotional wherewithal to fight back.

The fact of the matter is the MAJORITY of people prefer to settle the matter IF the settlement demand is fair and reasonable. But the majority of demands we see are not. And if you are so trusting of copyright trolls, please feel free to share your real name, website, and case. I am sure once someone gets wind of your name, website, and case and the fact that you seem so willing to settle, others might find other "infringements" you might have made and then you can add that to your insurance claim.

Keep making claims to your insurance company and you will see how much they want you as a customer.

I guess it just depends on the kind of person you are. Would you go into a store a steal something if the owner wasn't there? some people would and others wouldn't.

193

Getty Images Letter Forum / Oscar Michelen: Court Calls Out “Copyright Troll”, Fines Him $10K/Frivolous Suit

« on: March 14, 2018, 04:47:59 PM »

ELI's Oscar Michelen writes about "copyright infringement troll attorney Richard Liebowitz" and his frivolous lawsuit. Judge Cote called out Liebowitz as a "copyright troll" due to his filing 500 image infringement lawsuits in the last 2 years in New York.

https://courtroomstrategy.com/2018/03/court-labels-attorney-as-copyright-troll-and-fines-him-10000-over-frivolous-case-involving-photograph/

It is safe to say that copyright extortionist, Liebowtiz is the most prolific and abusive "lawsuiter" in ELI's history of covering photo image infringements.

194

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: PicRights Too

« on: March 12, 2018, 10:06:03 PM »

Not necessarily on PicRights specifically, but many "final offers" I have seen are actually not quite so final. The "finality" of an offer often depends on their assessment of the party and how close they think they are to settling a case.

Based on your experiences, how honest do you think they are with their "final offer"?

195

Getty Images Letter Forum / Techdirt: Court Orders Copyright Troll, Post $10K Bond, Client License Agreement

« on: March 12, 2018, 06:07:12 PM »

Techdirt has posted an article about Richard Liebowitz of Liebowitz Law Firm using "unusual" tactics to extract settlements.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180307/20363239383/court-orders-copyright-troll-to-post-10000-bond-after-he-lied-about-his-clients-licensing-agreement.shtml

Techdirt writes:

According to two recent orders handed down by two different judges, Liebowitz has filed more than 500 copyright cases in the Southern District of New York alone over the last two years, most often representing photographers.

Essentially, the lawyer/law firm (on behalf of his photographer clients) appears to have taken certain liberties in representing "facts" that are not quite so "factual". The law firm of Booth Sweet LLP apparently is the law firm fighting against Liebowitz.

Also, the fact that a court is willing to order a party to post bond, seems unusual. It generally means that a court is suspicious that the party's position may not be credible.

The article and court order goes into a lot of background information.

But the takeaway is that people should get educated and not be afraid to verify claims other parties make when they are trying to extract money from you. Things are never what they seem.

ELI is all about going below the surface of how these things work. Unfortunately, too many people do not get informed and let their fears and ignorance take over. I know most people are not lawyers but that does not mean they cannot get educated and be informed on a lot of relevant issues.