Messages

241

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network LLC v. The Scott LLC et al

« on: October 16, 2012, 10:34:10 PM »

So HAN made a big fuss and then did nothing? Is that the gist of it?

But they could still be counter-sued, correct? I mean somebody accumulated some legal bills during the course of this folly.

242

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: How does Getty Images calculate the settlement demand amount?

« on: October 15, 2012, 03:02:44 PM »

That video is soooo much better in the right context. I suggest you play this sound instead:

243

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: An Experiment Against Getty

« on: October 15, 2012, 02:54:22 PM »

Wow, great work Greg. The Getty claim, "I'm a legitimate businessman" isn't going to hold for much longer.  It's going to soon sound a lot like the protests the mobsters would all make before they went to jail.

244

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Court victory against Getty Images Master Delegate in Israel

« on: October 12, 2012, 12:23:28 PM »

I would be happy to if we can get our schedules to collide and Ian likes the idea.

245

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Court victory against Getty Images Master Delegate in Israel

« on: October 12, 2012, 12:13:53 PM »

I nominate Ian for the next "Eli Factor" video. He and Robert (or Matt or all 3) should do a Oovoo video conference and share it here.

Good work Ian.

246

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Infringement Letter from a Getty contributor

« on: October 06, 2012, 06:14:48 PM »

This is either a third-party scam and they have decided to hijack the Getty Image "business" model OR this is the original photographer that has decided to "go rogue" and try and scam some settlement on there own. The first case is probably the most likely as the second one would be a major violation of the terms of their agreement with Getty. I guess a third possibility is that it is the photographer, but they don't have an agreement with Getty and are just modeling their efforts after them. (And using their "good" name!)

In any case it is an interesting development. Also, whatever the case, I would treat it as spam and not respond. It turned up in your spam box, so your mail server or app identified it as spam. I would be interested in seeing the email header.

Bottom line, remove the image, don't reply, and don't loose a bit of sleep over this.

247

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: An Experiment Against Getty

« on: October 03, 2012, 01:59:44 PM »

Greg, I didn't hold out much hope for contacting the state AG's. And I know some people on here were even more pessimistic, considering any interaction with government agencies a complete waste of time. But I must say this "Experiment" is proving to be quite effective in raising awareness. Of course it yields the added bonus of putting a bee in the Getty bonnet.

Good work!

248

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in Switzerland: this time with LAWYERS letter

« on: October 03, 2012, 01:54:56 PM »

I'm sure they would LOVE to engage you in a conversation about how long you had it on your site. If and when you decide to engage them, I would say it's important (especially in your circumstance) to admit nothing. The general strategy of making them prove they have rights to the image appears to have been very effective here in the States.

249

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: What exact IS Google's DMCA policy?

« on: September 26, 2012, 07:09:24 PM »

Well the word on the street is now that the filmmaker did NOT get a release.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/innocence-of-muslims-lawsuit-cindy-lee-garcia-374470

Additionally it seems that Ms Garcia's attorney is following a course of action that I suggested when I first posted the article. Still, as that article points out, her claim is a long shot. But it should make for some interesting maneuvering.

I just find it ironic that Google loves the DMCA process until it gets in the way of what they want. And then they don't love it so much.

250

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is the domain owner liable or the company represented on the domain?

« on: September 22, 2012, 03:20:24 PM »

>>they even copied a customer of the website owner in their sloppiness

I wouldn't be too sure this is just "sloppy." This is an example of the shoddy business practices these stock companies are guilty of. They know they are not going to squeeze a settlement out of you. So they focus on your client and conveniently, "accidentally" copy one of THEIR clients to try and embarrass them into settling. At this stage, I think the best course of action would be to explain what they are doing to your client, hire Oscar on their behalf, and make it clear to the stock company that should they have any contact with your client's clients again, there will be serious repercussions.

By the way, what sort of underworld type tries to get someone to give them money by indicating they are happy to damage your reputation? Oh yeah, EXTORTIONISTS.

251

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Attorney J. Stephen Street Extortion Letter: Hawaiian Art Network/Vincent Tylor

« on: September 22, 2012, 03:08:12 PM »

About 3,380 results.

But we are not seeding.

Oh, lordy.

252

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Free Web Template Case and "Remix" Copyright Law?

« on: September 22, 2012, 03:05:35 PM »

I'm leery of claiming a site isn't published if it is on a public server. Robots.txt is more of a request, not an actual security setting. Claiming it is not published until it is announced on social media channels or using Google's webmaster tools would get you shredded in court. I can hear it now: "So you are saying prior to Facebook and Google no web sites were ever published?" Boom. You're done.

One could try and dig back into server logs, but those are not always present.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't use the lack of announcement as a defense. In fact when someone replies to these demand letters I think they should look at previous victim's court filings. In these, they list out the many reasons that the stock company's claim holds no water. I think it would be wise for anyone to generate a list of reasons they are not in violation. The more, the merrier.

253

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: What exact IS Google's DMCA policy?

« on: September 20, 2012, 03:43:41 PM »

Yes I thought about that. I guess the filmmaker got a release. But if he didn't (and he seems pretty scattered) maybe she could ague that she never released the copyright she holds on her likeness. Bah. That's a stretch. However Google does say this: "If a video contains your personal information without consent, including your image, name or national identification number, please contact us through our Privacy Complaint Process." She could argue that she did not give consent to be in THAT film.

I just feel sorry for this actress. She claims she has received death threats and cannot see her grandchildren.

Anyway, if the filmmaker was so concerned about the repercussions of what he did, HE would have taken it down himself.

254

Getty Images Letter Forum / What exact IS Google's DMCA policy?

« on: September 20, 2012, 02:50:27 PM »

I'm sure most of you are familiar with the "Innocence of Muslims" 14 minute film that has caused a stir in the Muslim world. I came across this article today:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/judge-rejects-actress-request-pull-372418

It seems Google actually sent attorneys to argue that the actress who was duped into being in the movie had no rights to even have a HEARING if the movie should be taken off YouTube.

Now, I'm for free speech as much as anyone. However I find it ironic that Google will yank anyone's video off YouTube with a simple DMCA claim and yet showed up in court to argue that this video didn't violate her right to privacy. If I were representing her I'd be looking into filing a DMCA complaint against it right now.

255

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: ELI Factor - Oscar, Robert & Matthew Threesome!

« on: September 17, 2012, 11:44:36 AM »

It may be worth mentioning that if you host your video on YouTube you get the support for transcripts and captions for "free." You can upload a transcript and/or a STL file which is a time-coded version of the transcript. YouTube even offers free voice to text transcription. Although in my experience this transcription is not very accurate.

Also, in my experience YouTube videos seem to rank well for search engine results. Although the ELI Oovoo videos have been ranking for many demand letter phrases, it seems to me the Google/YouTube videos that Robert has been creating have been knocking it out of the park, especially for certain "Demand Letter" phrases combined with the troll's lawyer's name.