46
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: UK Query
« on: March 08, 2012, 05:07:26 PM »
Do not forget to erase your history in the wayback archives if you go for barking the wrong tree !!!
| Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program | |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
47
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Resolution of Getty v. Advernet (A blow to Getty & Stock photo companies)
« on: March 08, 2012, 04:45:46 PM »
Hm… O.k. Just in case we are correct:
So GI bought the stone collection and that allowed them to sell the photos. But that did not allow them to go after copyright infringers for that they had to go to the photographer and ask for the transfer of the copyright. Just create following situation: They bought the collection in 2008. In 2009 they contacted the photographer and they got the copyright from the photographer. But they started in 2008 sending the letters to people who were using photos of the stone collection. All of them took the pictures off their website in 2008 at once. Now Getty has no case against this people and cannot sue them. But the photographer could sue them because he owned the copyright in 2008.
Thank you very much for your input
So GI bought the stone collection and that allowed them to sell the photos. But that did not allow them to go after copyright infringers for that they had to go to the photographer and ask for the transfer of the copyright. Just create following situation: They bought the collection in 2008. In 2009 they contacted the photographer and they got the copyright from the photographer. But they started in 2008 sending the letters to people who were using photos of the stone collection. All of them took the pictures off their website in 2008 at once. Now Getty has no case against this people and cannot sue them. But the photographer could sue them because he owned the copyright in 2008.
Thank you very much for your input
48
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Resolution of Getty v. Advernet (A blow to Getty & Stock photo companies)
« on: March 08, 2012, 03:33:36 PM »
I am working myself through the law language . Here comes my question regarding this text:
Wojtczak explained that Exhibit 3's category “Collection” is “the image collection that the image belongs to, on the Getty Images website” and category “Contract Company/Brand” is “thecontract detail for the original contract company or brand that the photographer first signed the agreement; the corresponding agreement date.” When asked by the Court “how one determinesthat a photographer gave rights to what is called a brand company or contract brand companyand then how those rights from the photographer come to Getty Images,” Wojtczak failed to respond;
In many cases the Stone Collection is involved. Do I read correct that the judge asked how the rights (iwere transferred to GI in case they buy a collection or stock company ? And that the Getty guy could not answer this? So for example GI bought the Stone collection but the exclusive rights from the photographer are not automatically transferred to Getty ? I am afraid I am missing something here.
Thank you very much for any comments
Wojtczak explained that Exhibit 3's category “Collection” is “the image collection that the image belongs to, on the Getty Images website” and category “Contract Company/Brand” is “thecontract detail for the original contract company or brand that the photographer first signed the agreement; the corresponding agreement date.” When asked by the Court “how one determinesthat a photographer gave rights to what is called a brand company or contract brand companyand then how those rights from the photographer come to Getty Images,” Wojtczak failed to respond;
In many cases the Stone Collection is involved. Do I read correct that the judge asked how the rights (iwere transferred to GI in case they buy a collection or stock company ? And that the Getty guy could not answer this? So for example GI bought the Stone collection but the exclusive rights from the photographer are not automatically transferred to Getty ? I am afraid I am missing something here.
Thank you very much for any comments
49
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 07, 2012, 03:50:17 PM »
I do not know if my information is correct:
It appears that their is a limit of £ 500,-- (excl. Interest etc). If you look at the settlement demand notes most of them will exceed this limit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents_County_Court
I do not know if it makes sense for Getty to go to court for this small amount of money.
It appears that their is a limit of £ 500,-- (excl. Interest etc). If you look at the settlement demand notes most of them will exceed this limit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents_County_Court
I do not know if it makes sense for Getty to go to court for this small amount of money.
50
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 06, 2012, 02:56:09 AM »
Dear Matthew
Thank you very much for your answer. I think I understand what you want to say. The human element is often unpredictable and being authentic is essential.
Thank you very much
Khan
Thank you very much for your answer. I think I understand what you want to say. The human element is often unpredictable and being authentic is essential.
Thank you very much
Khan
51
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 05, 2012, 05:30:06 PM »
Dear Matthew
Just to understand you correctly: Do you suggest that if you can get the pictures elsewhere (and you have the proof) to go for the affirmative defense. I think then they have no case even if you got the picture from the internet.
In my case I have the proof that I can buy the photo directly from the photographer (and I bought it afterwards just because to proof I can buy it somewhere else). Why not asking Getty to show their exclusive contract?
In my response I did not say anything about an infringement and did not admit to anything. I just asked for proof since I have got other evidence.
Sorry to insist. Thank you very much for your help
Khan
P.S.
Just to understand you correctly: Do you suggest that if you can get the pictures elsewhere (and you have the proof) to go for the affirmative defense. I think then they have no case even if you got the picture from the internet.
In my case I have the proof that I can buy the photo directly from the photographer (and I bought it afterwards just because to proof I can buy it somewhere else). Why not asking Getty to show their exclusive contract?
In my response I did not say anything about an infringement and did not admit to anything. I just asked for proof since I have got other evidence.
Sorry to insist. Thank you very much for your help
Khan
P.S.
52
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 05, 2012, 04:07:31 PM »
Speaking about the judge:
Look at the Advernet case. That is the company you are dealing with (it is not the BBC). They have a bad track record not you. They want your money. Do not be worried about the judge. Gather enough evidence which show why you (and everybody else should too) distrust Getty regarding their allegations. You do not have to believe somebody who has a track record of lying.
Look at the Advernet case. That is the company you are dealing with (it is not the BBC). They have a bad track record not you. They want your money. Do not be worried about the judge. Gather enough evidence which show why you (and everybody else should too) distrust Getty regarding their allegations. You do not have to believe somebody who has a track record of lying.
53
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 05, 2012, 11:53:55 AM »
Just for to show goodwil 
:
Sufi Proverb:
Pick up a bee from kindness, and lern the limitations of kindness.
Tacitus:
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit, because gratidude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
:Sufi Proverb:
Pick up a bee from kindness, and lern the limitations of kindness.
Tacitus:
Men are more ready to repay an injury than a benefit, because gratidude is a burden and revenge a pleasure.
54
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 05, 2012, 09:57:22 AM »
That is what I wanted to say : Do not admit any wrong doing 
55
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Yet another letter recipient
« on: March 05, 2012, 09:06:53 AM »
Here is a link with different search engines
http://www.comptalks.com/top-10-reverse-image-search-engines/
http://www.comptalks.com/top-10-reverse-image-search-engines/
56
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 05, 2012, 09:02:46 AM »
I tend to stick with buddhapi. Admitting something to someone who can’t support his allegations properly or is not willing support his allegations is no good idea. Just think who they are: They are not the state attorney or the judge. They are just people you do not know personally and who you despise because of their conduct and attitude. Look at all the cases against Getty Images they do not admit anything (never) 
.
.
57
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK
« on: March 04, 2012, 02:06:16 PM »
Information is the key word. I have seen a couple of lawyers. The best lawyers are not worth a penny if they do not have the right information. This forum gives you tons of information which you can use yourself or give it to your lawyer which will help him to defend you properly. But you always have to do your share as well
Start with the basics and do not anticipate that G.I. is doing a proper job. They are just greedy.
Start with the basics and do not anticipate that G.I. is doing a proper job. They are just greedy.
58
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New image bot Pixray
« on: March 02, 2012, 04:25:32 PM »
The ip location is Hetzner Online AG in Germany (biggest internet hosting company in Germany). This Company had a severe security issue last year October. During weeks password lists, bank data and even police emails were open and accessible for almost everybody. 
Normally the German data law is very strict. They always picking on facebook data gathering.
Normally the German data law is very strict. They always picking on facebook data gathering.
59
Getty Images Letter Forum / Model Release
« on: March 01, 2012, 05:13:41 PM »
Speaking about buying time :
Just in case there are people in the pictures. Shouldn’t GI provide the model release in addition to their “exclusive” license? If there is no model release they are not entitled to market the pictures. Am I correct?
Thank you very much for your help.
Khan
: Just in case there are people in the pictures. Shouldn’t GI provide the model release in addition to their “exclusive” license? If there is no model release they are not entitled to market the pictures. Am I correct?
Thank you very much for your help.
Khan
60
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Beat the Getty Images Extortion Letter: Special Report!
« on: March 01, 2012, 05:04:13 PM »
I am impressed and I really would like join in for the beta version
Official ELI Help Options |
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |