Messages

2116

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Screengrabs lack of credibility??

« on: March 31, 2012, 11:49:28 AM »

the inner working of the picscout /getty relationship are pretty clear, Getty owns them both! IT's troll feeding trolls, who then feed copyright attorney trolls, and collection agency trolls...

2117

Getty Images Letter Forum / It’s High Time to throw someone under the bus…

« on: March 31, 2012, 11:35:59 AM »

Since we've had few extortion demands letters from new unexperienced lawyers as of late, and I've been chomping at the bit, I did myself some rooting around..


Uri Lavi - General Manager, PicScout ( I’d be inclined to add “Copyright Troll Extrodinaire” to his title.

"Uri joined PicScout bringing years of varied R&D experience ranging from data fusion and intelligence research applications to command and control (C2I) applications. Prior to PicScout, Uri managed various R&D departments, from which he brought significant experience in large-scale, complex business and database systems. Uri holds a B.Sc. in software engineering from the Technion, the Israeli Institute of Technology."

Among other hobbies Uri enjoys reading, traveling and spending time with his family.



LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/urilavi

Uri Lavi is an aspiring software craftsman with extensive experience in data intensive, business compound, distributed and scalable software systems. Uri specializes in mentoring, coaching and consulting on complex software engineering topics, among which: Clean Code, Refactoring, Software Architecture & Leadership.

http://www.irefactor.net/

his “video” channel: http://vimeo.com/urilavi

Uri’s Patents: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110158533

2118

Righthaven Lawsuits Forum / EFF Slams Righthaven CEO For Pretending He Can Ignore Court Orders

« on: March 31, 2012, 09:06:03 AM »

We recently wrote about Righthaven CEO Steve Gibson's bizarre claim that a court order directed at him is inapplicable because he's just the CEO, and the company's own lawyers (who he blames everything on) won't return his calls. Now the EFF (who is representing Thomas DiBiase in the case) has filed a response (pdf) in which they highlight how positively insane it is for Gibson to pretend that, as a CEO, he can avoid responding to court orders directed as a company. The whole thing is worth reading -- these are just a few good snippets (it was tough to narrow it down to figure out which ones to quote):
Mr. Gibson’s claim that he has “not heard from Righthaven’s legal counsel [Mr. Mangano] since February, 2012,” and that Mr. Mangano has simply disappeared is similar to Mr. DiBiase’s experience.2 Resp. at 3. However, it is quite perplexing in light of Righthaven’s consent to the withdrawal of attorney Dale Cendali just last week in Righthaven v. Democratic Underground, Case No. 10-cv-01356-RLH-GWF (Dkt. 186) (March 21, 2012), knowingly leaving that case solely in the hands of Mr. Mangano. Presumably Mr. Gibson, as a responsible CEO, would not give that consent knowing it left Righthaven without representation.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120330/03575018300/eff-slams-righthaven-ceo-pretending-he-can-ignore-court-orders.shtml

2119

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Screengrabs lack of credibility??

« on: March 30, 2012, 05:30:36 PM »

Lettered has a very good point.. What it really boils down to, is not "if" there was an infringement, because in most cases by the letter of the law there probably has been, the real item in question is the amount they seek, how they come to this amount, and the methods by which they attempt to collect this amount.. I purchased my images, and had a license, if Getty had said to me, well we now own these images, please pay us a reasonable amount, I may have considered it at the time, just to make them go away, but there was no way in hell I was paying what they were asking for , for something I already purchased years prior.

BTW, it's not a good idea to ever lie /fib / stretch a story to a judge, trust me don't ever do it..

2120

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: UK Query

« on: March 30, 2012, 05:22:30 PM »

Just checking back in guys...initial fright on receipt of our letter has dissapated and been replaced by anger at the sheer arrogance of GI !  We are going to sit tight and wait to see what happens next.

Thanks for all of the good advice so far and keep up the good fight !

Anger is what it takes! Keep us posted..

2121

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Screengrabs lack of credibility??

« on: March 30, 2012, 01:58:39 PM »

It would be upon the plaintiff to be able to prove, a simple demonstration to the judge, showing how easy it is would most likely make him think about it..thus weakening their case even more.

2122

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Screengrabs lack of credibility??

« on: March 30, 2012, 01:05:08 PM »

That could potentially throw a wrench into the works, I use firebug and it never even dawned on me that this could be used as part of a defense..

2123

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

« on: March 29, 2012, 02:21:10 PM »

I also think it is a mistake to assume anything. GI may send you a "blurry PicScout screenshot" as proof of their claim. But to assume that they don't have multiple crystal clear shots is a huge mistake. I know if I were pursuing this I would gather as much supporting proof as possible.

I also think it's foolish to assume that the date of their letter is the date of their discovery. I'm certain there is a period of days, if not weeks or months that pass before they send out a notice. To outright lie about this information is just going to make you look like a jerk. You know when you put it up. Of course I'm not saying you should volunteer the exact date you uploaded the image in early conversations.

I'm doing some homework on any patterns as to when Getty and others send out letters, I've been noticing a trend, where the forums seem to get quiet, and then all of a sudden get busy again.. I can't help but think that Getty tends to send out letters on a monthly basis all in one shot. If anywould would like to volunteer when their letters were dated it would help in my research, I f a pattern emerges I'll have a look at how hawaiian art network operates as well..it might just be me, but in talking with Matt recently, we discussed the fact that it's usually quiet right before the storm.. This would lend credibility to the fact that you can't use the date of the letter as date of the infringement discovery.....Poor mail mail must hate to pick up Getty's mail on the dates in questions...if it pans out

2124

P2P/BitTorrent Lawsuits Forum / Two Florida judges reject copyright troll fishing expeditions

« on: March 29, 2012, 09:56:33 AM »

Last week we reported on a scathing order signed by a Florida state judge in one of several copyright trolling cases pending in the state of Florida. After we published the story, we learned that Judge Marc Schumacher had withdrawn the order. Evidently, it had been drafted by one of the defendants, and Judge Schumacher had signed it on the mistaken belief that it had been agreed to by all parties in the case.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/03/two-florida-judges-reject-copyright-troll-fishing-expeditions.ars

2125

Righthaven Lawsuits Forum / Righthaven Case Gets Even More Bizarre: CEO Files Statement About How Righthaven

« on: March 29, 2012, 07:53:50 AM »

Every time you think the Righthaven farce must be over -- or, at the very least, couldn't get any stranger -- something new pops up. The latest is that Righthaven CEO Steve Gibson (who, as we've mentioned, has already moved on to a new lawyer job, while still technically being CEO of Righthaven) has submitted a bizarre filing with the court that basically plays the "me? I've got nothing to do with any of this!" card in trying to avoid having to provide some key documents in one of the many cases where Righthaven owes attorneys' fees for its bogus lawsuits.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120328/12311918280/righthaven-case-gets-even-more-bizarre-ceo-files-statement-about-how-righthavens-own-lawyer-wont-respond-to-him.shtml

2126

Legal Controversies Forum / A good read regarding Pinterest and infringement

« on: March 28, 2012, 11:19:33 AM »

Pinterest Copyright Infringement: Yeah, so what?

The latest hot startup in the photo-sharing space is one that is also creating a lot of controversy about copyright infringement. Pinterest lets users create "boards" of images they find from around the Web. Users “pin up” these images, and share them with friends and strangers.

“Is this copyright infringement,” you ask?

http://danheller.blogspot.com/2012/03/pinterest-demonstrates-photo-industrys.html

I do believe his thinking is flawed in one specific area when it comes to linking:

"Literally copying content is one form of copyright infringement, but that's not what we're talking about here. The fact that the content is merely "displayed on a website not authorized by the copyright holder" is technically an infringement."

This goes back to the Perfect 10 case and if in fact it was true, Google would have been sued 1000's of times over..

2127

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / This could possibly be a good thing for image letter recpients

« on: March 28, 2012, 09:39:13 AM »

I have not done ANY research on this case, from what I gather it is in regards to  downloads other than stock images ( movies, videos & music) whoever the decision may be of assistance to recipients of demand letters regarding stock photos...

A blow for speculative invoicing?
Yesterday the ruling in the Golden Eye case was handed down. It's overall pretty useful news for those who've been concerned aboutthe practice of what's been called 'speculative invoicing.'

This practice sees copyright owners or representatives writing en masse to alleged infringers of copyrights (in this case Golden Eye were seeking around 9,000 of O2's customers' details), demanding large sums (typically over £500, and in this case £700) with threats of court action attached. The letters tend to overstate or misrepresent the case and hence pressure the consumer into settling. In reality cases are hardly ever brought to court. When they are brought in front of the courts ACS:Law and Golden Eye have sought to discontinue the cases, and thus avoid judicial scrutiny, if a default judgment cannot be obtained.

http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2012/a-blow-for-speculative-invoicing

I also like the new phrase presented here "Speculative Invoicing"

2128

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Roll the Dice? - Is Getty likely to win an award GREATER than initial demand?

« on: March 28, 2012, 09:18:50 AM »

#1 Copyright infringement is a federal matter, so no small claims court does not apply.

#2 probably not

Chance are it won't go to court anyway, as it's been said here many times, going to court over 1 image is costly, and generally not worth the effort, especially since Getty Images has weak cases for the most part

2129

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Stock Photo Extortion Letter Online Petition

« on: March 28, 2012, 07:13:39 AM »

If and when you get find time for this, I will be important to get ALL ELI members on board to not only sign the petition, but also to go one step further and help spread the word via Social Media channels. It would be nice if everybody would be willing to share via their facebook and twitter accounts encouraging their friends / followers to sign and also share with their friends and followers.

2130

Righthaven Lawsuits Forum / Righthaven Completely Stops Showing Up In Court, Loses Key Case, Key Appeals And

« on: March 26, 2012, 08:25:25 AM »

Over the past few weeks there's been some more Righthaven news, as the company has continued the trend it started last year of not showing up and missing deadlines. Now it appears that it's just completely given up. CEO Steve Gibson is working at another job (while being investigated by the Nevada Bar) and main lawyer Shawn Mangano apparently has completely stopped responding to all attempts to contact him, even by the court. All this has resulted in the key appeals in its cases to be dismissed "for lack of prosecution." Last Thursday it also had a key case closed, with prejudice, driving another (yes another) nail in its already buried coffin.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120324/00595118232/righthaven-completely-stops-showing-up-court-loses-key-case-key-appeals-big-name-lawyer-who-it-still-owes-money-to.shtml