Messages

256

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: 9th Circuit Decision

« on: March 24, 2014, 08:48:32 AM »

It most likely will, which is the very reason why we need to keep the pressure up on the courts and our lawmakers to fix this mess.  The law is the law, but there is something very wrong with any law that allows large companies to use the law to extort from individuals and small companies.

We must work to get this changed.

257

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images Sued for Patent Infringement

« on: March 19, 2014, 02:30:23 PM »

While punishing Getty sounds pleasing to these ears, the real pleasure will come when Timmy has to find a job.

258

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney advises to JUST IGNORE THE GETTY & McCORMACK LETTERS

« on: March 12, 2014, 09:40:21 PM »

@Mulligan, your second approach has me ROFL.

I wish I had thought of it.

259

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney advises to JUST IGNORE THE GETTY & McCORMACK LETTERS

« on: March 12, 2014, 04:33:15 PM »

Over two years ago, when I received my first Getty letter, I felt like a lot of people on this forum: that I should respond and set the record straight if, for no other reason, to have the fact on record that I tried to settle, should I ever find myself in court over this matter.

Having monitored this forum and Getty's behavior for over two years now,  I am of a different mind.  I think the advice you ere given is quite good.  If this happened to me today, that advice might very well be what I would follow.

260

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Big Change at Getty -- Free Use

« on: March 06, 2014, 04:01:37 PM »

Good find Lucia!  I see two very interesting quotes in this article.

Embedded images will not be allowed in contexts that promote products or businesses. “That’s a pretty clear delineation,” Peters says. “We’ll enforce the terms of this license if people start using these images to do that.”

What this one means to me is that they will continue to use their bullying tactics on those that meet the profile they define (as good victims).

According to records compiled by Bloomberg Law, Getty has only filed seven copyright infringement lawsuits in the past five years. Of those, five came in a single week this January.

This one means that people who get threatening letters should calm down.  Somehow we should find a way to plaster this stat all over ELI.  It doesn't mean you won't be sued, but you should take the time to breath, relax, research, and find your first best way to deal with this issue.

261

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Big Change at Getty -- Free Use

« on: March 06, 2014, 09:58:40 AM »

I totally agree with you guys.  Getty is going to draw far more stringent lines with this program than many believe.

Infringement claims will likely go up.  I wonder if this new direction is part of why Timmy is trying to clean up his image.

262

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Big Change at Getty -- Free Use

« on: March 05, 2014, 08:39:33 PM »

I, for one, am not buying it.

I don't trust this company and never will.

From 2005-2007, Getty's Royalty Free Images page looked like they were doing the same thing - giving those images away in order to build a clientele that might license their more valuable images later.

Then they changed their policy - and covered their tracks.  All traces of their Royalty Free Images page prior to 2007 were removed from the way back Machine.  The new page made it clear that Royalty free images were not free.

Five years later, they began sending extortion letters to people who had used the free images when they appeared free.  In those five years, the company had gone public, and then private again.  That gave them plausible deniability - e.g. We don't know what the policy was back then.

The problem is that the same sharks who were running the company then are still running it today.  Jonathon Klein says on tape that their images are free for non-commercial use, but chases down everyone they can find who is small enough to not have a legal team behind them, and dumb enough to have believed him.

Tread carefully on this announcement.  Who knows what their policy will be next year?

263

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Oscar is not Matthew's Daddy

« on: March 03, 2014, 09:49:40 AM »

Trolls beware, Matthew Chan is back on the beat. 

Way to go, Matt!

264

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Leaning towards the ignore method, but a little worried….

« on: February 28, 2014, 06:21:20 PM »

That does not mean that they will stop trying to collect.  I believe NCS is a collection agency.  If so, you can tell them that this is a claim, not a debt.

If not, you are over one year into the three year statute of limitations.  Don't let them rattle you.

265

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: John Deboer Letter and Registration

« on: February 26, 2014, 09:38:33 AM »

Good points Greg.  I agree.

266

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: John Deboer Letter and Registration

« on: February 26, 2014, 07:54:32 AM »

It makes sense not to settle if they don't have the rights to the image that they claim to have.

If you decide to settle without verifying that they have the rights they claim to have, you should not advertise the fact that you may be a willing patsy, lest others choose to come after you.

267

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Complaint from BWP Media USA

« on: February 21, 2014, 05:50:32 PM »

Lucia, what Greg said.  I am beginning to believe you were a lawyer in a previous life.

268

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Steven Turner - Washington State Copyright Extortion Lawyer Targets Australian

« on: February 15, 2014, 10:26:55 PM »

A well written post Rocketboy.

Welcome to the fight.  As Matthew probably already told you, you should refrain from email or phone communication over this.  And keep us posted on how it proceeds.

269

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty getting some of its own medicine

« on: February 08, 2014, 11:31:18 AM »

I agree with you Lettered that Getty does not want their liability to be anything more than what you paid. 

However, if you combine that with the following facts:

• they market themselves as digital image experts
• they don't really do enough to verify that they have the right to license the images they license.  They write an unsigned contract with customers limiting their liability to money's paid.  They write an unsigned contract with contributors saying the contributors are responsible for owning the rights the contract transfers to Getty.

Wouldn't someone expect an expert to have a little more responsibility than that?

270

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Oscar Michelen & Matthew Chan quoted in International Business Times article

« on: February 08, 2014, 11:14:00 AM »

True karma would involve Timmy making the mistake that brings down Getty.

So far Getty has been smart enough to not let this happen.  However, with all the recent self promotion that Timmy has been doing to position himself as an IP law expert, Getty might have to think about cutting him loose, to distance themselves from the legal mistakes that he is certain to make.