Messages

2836

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Can we start a "Success Mission Accomplished" Thread for success stories?

« on: August 03, 2011, 04:46:39 PM »

Good question LittleScoop, unfortantely one I cannot answer fully, however I can tell you that I retained Oscar and had my letter drafted in May 2009. I have not heard anything since, I can only assume that if my case was escalated I would have been contacted By Oscars firm. My general understanding is that once Getty gets the letter from Oscar, they tend to back off and go for others. This does not mean that it may raise it's ugly head again, I guess there is always that possability.

2837

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Alaska Stock Images Settlement Demand Letter

« on: August 02, 2011, 05:00:35 PM »

Much gentler indeed!, I would be willing to bet they'd be more than happy to negotiate as well.

2838

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: PicScout is possibly flawed

« on: July 31, 2011, 01:10:59 PM »

I concur, but the fact remains that the letter shows 1 image on 1 page, yet it also shows 4 of GI library images, they won't say which one cause they want to collect on all 4..This scenario should show up on your desk at some point, as my client is supposed to contact you and I think she has used your letter on a different occasion as well..

Thanx again for your dedication to this cause!

2839

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: PicScout is possibly flawed

« on: July 31, 2011, 12:56:05 PM »

then again maybe Oscar won't see it....

2840

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: yet another copyright troll

« on: July 31, 2011, 07:29:17 AM »

All I know, besides that I know besides knowing hardly anything concerning copyright law is this.

1. I legally purchased some templates/ images over 12 years ago
2. GI sent me a "claim" letter so I owe them nothing, nada, zilch
3. I know the burden of proof is with Getty, but I was kind enough to provide them with the license for said image.
3. GI did not like the license I sent them , then asked for a reciept, which  I don't have as it was so long ago
4. I'm sure as hell not paying this amount for an image that is 49.00 to licence thru them. Regardless of what it cost to track me down, and regardless of the amount GI claims to have "lost", as they 've already made that back plus more, from people who freak, don't get educated and write them a check!

Perhaps if they change the way they go about "collecting" this would not be such a huge issue in the first place.

2841

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Many of Masterfile CD's with images at US Library of Congress are corrupted

« on: July 30, 2011, 02:47:59 PM »

Now thats an interesting concept! Thanx for sharing!

2842

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

« on: July 29, 2011, 05:14:37 PM »

Well said SG, the "trolling" doesn't apply to everybody or every scenario, in the case mentioned in this post the image is most likely registered properly, and they most likely have all of thier ducks in a row. Carolyn is well respected and I still doubt she would use this tactic without having a strong conviction that she could win in a court of law..is the amount over the top?? perhaps, but who knows what this photographer sells his work for?? I'm sure there is enough built into that number to cover atty fees, aggravation fees and some pocket change too.. We know GI sells most of their images for less than 100.00 per license, yet they demand sometimes more than 10x that amount...hence the troll moniker..I also think this is where Matt came up with the 200-300 figure, as it would be much more reasonable, as opposed to " a grab as much we can" scenario..

On another note I've actually had a run in with the NFL with a company I used to work for, they certainly could have filed suit, but instead did the "right" thing and sent a cease and desist..end of story

2843

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

« on: July 29, 2011, 01:27:12 PM »

what may seem "confidential" to them, may not seem the same to others, just further proof that they are among us and not liking whats said /shown here..

2844

Getty Images Letter Forum / yet another copyright troll

« on: July 29, 2011, 07:38:16 AM »

Although I don't believe it's image related, it fairly recent and the judge is not happy, perhaps this can help us eventually as more judges become aware of these tactics and discover that it truly is a business model..

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110430/00274114096/judge-slams-copyright-troll-lawyer-john-steeles-latest-fishing-expedition.shtml

2845

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

« on: July 28, 2011, 02:43:50 PM »

Good discussion here.

My main concern with this entire situation is that the more that people pay when they do not need to, the more the dark side of this industry grows.

S.G.

you hit the nail on the head here! Nothing frazzles me more than hearing of people that cave in, and open their wallets..without first getting educated and learning what options are available. the more people pay the more paper and toner they can buy to print their demands!

2846

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

« on: July 28, 2011, 11:04:40 AM »

Greetings S.G,
You certainly make some valid points, and my thinking could certainly be flawed! ( and probably is) My assumption that the image in question is most likely registered stems from the fact that it is stated in the letter, and yes you are correct that this really means nothing and is certainly not proof, I also took the time to search the US copyright site for the artist in question and he has loads of registered images, furthering my belief that this one would be included, why would he go thru the hassle of registering over 1500 images, but not this one??.. I do agree with you 100% that the trolls will seek as much money $ as possible, regardless of the facts or burden of proof..

Hi All,

I respectfully diagree with the statement that, "I also believe the image in question is registered with the US Copyright Office, or they wouldn't be asking for so much. My thinking is the price goes up on any registered images, cause they have much more leeway."

People ask for as much money as they can, regardless of copyright standing.  I's dangerous to equate greed with standing, as every copyright troll would raise their demands in order to look "legitimate".

I always get a laugh when I see the strongly-worded legal demands that quote broad sections of the Copyright Act.  All the legal standing that CTRL-C and CTRL-P can muster.  After all the threatening legal boilerplate?  Nothing.  No proof of copyright.

No proof means that you don't pay.

S.G.

2847

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

« on: July 28, 2011, 07:38:30 AM »

She is indeed very well known with Professional Photographers, I would not take her lightly either, I also believe the image in question is registered with the US Copyright Office, or they wouldn't be asking for so much. My thinking is the price goes up on any registered images, cause they have much more leeway.

2848

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: July 27, 2011, 12:35:21 PM »

well thats a bummer to say the least...perhaps you could grab a screenshot from archive.org of the template in question from TM, before they removed the offending image to further prove that TM supplied you with the template.. It's a stretch, but you might get lucky and if they realise that TM was selling this template to potentially 100's/1000's of affiliates, they may change direction.. Good luck and please keep us posted on this

2849

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Template Monster and Getty - my story

« on: July 27, 2011, 11:16:53 AM »

How are you serving the templates? Usually TM affiliates would use an IFrame to serve them thru thier sites, if this is the case, you could simply point out that the template they are referring to is not hosted on your site and is being hosted/servede thru TM server, that could /should get you off the hook..same goes for the purchase of the template was the purchase actually done on your site or was it done thru TM's affiliate interface???

Hope this helps..

2850

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Solved Both Of My Getty Images Cases Myself

« on: July 24, 2011, 05:28:07 PM »

Thats cool that they gave you a refund, I was told by Getty that if the template I purchased was from TemplateMonster, they would just need the order number / invoice number and they would close the case. Getty had sued them earlier and there was a settlement, so TM I think bound by law to step up to the plate for any templates purchased using questionable images.