Messages

196

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got a letter from a "Photo Attorney" who is on Caroline Wrights team

« on: March 04, 2013, 12:17:35 PM »

Shelly, I'm not sure where you bought your microstock images from. But I ask that you avoid purchases from iStockPhotos as this company is owned by Getty Images. There is no sense in helping to "feed" the trolls in any way.

197

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: An Experiment Against Getty

« on: February 21, 2013, 03:03:43 PM »

Greg that post just put the glorious image of some Getty Images legal drone staring into his computer, setting down his powdered sugar donut, and saying, "uh-oh."

198

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: $9,000 for 1 image! Photo Attorney Extortion Letter by Carolyn E.Wright law firm

« on: February 21, 2013, 02:12:51 PM »

Although the site owner should get educated here, I would be very surprised if this went anywhere. I looked at the site. There is ZERO commercial gain, not so much as a block of Google AdWords. It is truly the ultimate fan site. Also, although the owner did not have a DMCA agent, a member of the site was the one to upload the images. Typically I would expect this to go nowhere. However I believe the Carolyn E.Wright law firm has been known to file on looser cases such as this. So it's important to document everything and engage the support network here as much as possible.

By the way, do you think the photographer Carolyn E.Wright represents got a model release from Joni Mitchell?

I also notice that http://jonimitchell.com/justice.cfm just says "To be continued." I wonder why. Remember, the truth will set you free. There is nothing wrong with posting factual information on your site and I don't think the owner of jonimitchell.com should be persuaded to do otherwise.

199

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: An Experiment Against Getty

« on: February 21, 2013, 01:59:42 PM »

"The campaign to file complaints against us is misguided and misdirected"

BOO HOO!

Gee I wonder where Getty would like this campaign to be guided and directed. Personally I think the campaign to extort money out of current and potential customers is "misguided and misdirected." But that ain't stopping anyone.

I wonder, is it possible to offer up a rebuttal to their rebuttal? I'm sure the D.A. does not need to be reminded that Getty seldom (never?) provides proof that THEY control the copyright to an image in question, that the image is properly registered, and that the image is exclusively theirs to represent. But maybe a little reminder is a good thing.

200

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images Letter Received 2nd letter

« on: February 15, 2013, 11:36:14 AM »

You know, one of the things I did in my case is I told McCormack that I would begin tracking my time. I told them that if they continued to pursue this matter I would be forced to consult with my friend who is a high-priced attorney. I also told them I would be seeking remuneration for these expenses dealing with this issue and it was very important that they pass this information along to their client.

It wasn't long after that I got a call from McCormack's office telling me that Getty woul, "no longer be pursuing this issue."

201

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New Case

« on: February 13, 2013, 06:09:37 PM »

Ditto everything Robert said. I'll just add that the idea of laying low in the interest of them "going easy on you" or not tipping your hand doesn't seem to work. They already know the standard game plan and the moment you request proof of copyright registration they will know you have been here.

It seems that the people that are loud, name names, and make it very clear that they are willing to go to the mat on the issue seem to get left alone pretty quickly. The people that keep it on the down-low and appear that they are working toward a settlement seem to get pestered a great deal more.

At least that's my impression.

202

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Defense League Attempts to Squelch Settlement Agreement & Release

« on: February 07, 2013, 11:57:58 AM »

That Star Trek photo is WINNING!

I wonder if people like Randy Taylor and the Copyright Defense League realize that with every DMCA takedown notice they give all of us something to comment on? It's like they want to help us to build traffic and get OUR message out.

Guess what site currently has the top three rankings for a google search for "Copyright Defense League DMCA. " Okay I'll tell you: extortionletterinfo.com.

203

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Help from the Eli Community Needed

« on: February 06, 2013, 01:17:16 PM »

Greg,

You can count on me for a contribution. How much depends on how well I'm rolling when the time comes to pay up. But at least know that I'll kick in for the minimum.

I'm not sure what you'll learn from this. But the one thing I do know now is that when you are on a mission, woe be to the trolls.

204

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Entrapment???

« on: January 29, 2013, 03:47:10 AM »

Although I agree that GI probably does not "seed" their images, several other factors have occurred that leave many, many of their images in copyright limbo.

• Other stock footage companies have sold their images to be included in templates. When Getty acquires these collections, they have pursued a course of action that assumes if a site did not purchase a license from GI they are infringing.
• Sometime in late 1999 GI themselves released CDs of FPO (for position only) images on CD-ROM. The terms of use for this collection were not entirely clear and I think many people believed that these were free to use. I have been trying (unsuccessfully) to track down these CDs to see how the EULA was framed.
• I believe some photographers have sold rights to their images to multiple entities.

There are, of course, many more ways an image GI represents as their exclusive property may be neither exclusive or even their property. But as we have all seen, requiring them to prove that it is, is universally resisted by all the trolls.

205

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Class action suit filed against “Getty Images Master Delegate” in Israel.

« on: January 29, 2013, 03:27:04 AM »

Thanks for sharing that Ian. I love hearing about these reasonable proceedings around the world. Good luck next month. It looks like the tide is going your way.

206

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Letter from Masterfile

« on: January 24, 2013, 01:55:57 PM »

Hey Unemployed, keep your chin up.

I have a theory that the stock agencies in general and MF in particular tend to target people they suspect will roll over easily. Even if they are unable to prevail in court, if they can just get some people to not show up and get a few default judgements, it makes it look as if they are "winning" cases.

So you have to make it very clear that you will not be rolling over.

Besides, as Lucia points out, you are essentially "judgement proof." I think you are on the right path. Reply with a strongly worded letter, stay connected to the ELI forum, and concentrate on your core business.

207

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Interesting Article from a Pissed Getty Contributor

« on: January 19, 2013, 02:47:49 PM »

Getty's business model:

• Alienate its contributors
• Threaten to sue its customers

What could possibly go wrong?

208

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: ELI Forum Announcement

« on: January 19, 2013, 01:33:43 PM »

Porting everything over to a new host, redeploying it all, testing it all, and back in action within 24 hours is very admirable. Good job guys!

209

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Defense League aka SendDMCA.com

« on: January 12, 2013, 04:08:22 PM »

http://www.copyrightdefenseleague.com/ is packed with good information for anyone wanting to hire his "firm" to chase down infringements... 

Everyone, seriously, take a look at the link Robert posted. It's hilarious. I didn't get what Greg meant until I visited the site. Way to share the valuable info Randy Taylor!

210

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Who can I get images from?

« on: January 11, 2013, 08:21:39 PM »

I agree with this in general. But sometimes you really need a picture of a hot air balloon or a shark. In THOSE cases I suggest either a.) using stock footage that is from a legitimate US site that claims it is in the public domain -- and document that source meticulously; or b.) use a fair microstock company that doesn't threaten to sue their customers and keep your receipts.

Sure, neither of these guarantees that some copyright troll won't claim ownership and hassle you. But they seem to do it anyway. We've heard reports of them hassling people that obtained images from paid for templates, and even licensed images that just barely went over their license period.

So by all means, if it's a simple image, shoot it yourself. If it is more complex, their are plenty of resources.