Messages

46

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Photographer responded to my email ....

« on: August 02, 2011, 04:39:39 PM »

Thanks, S.G.!
I think that I will re-read the agreement one more time.
btw, that copy that we got from MF has some blank space in some sections, like, the text was covered with a piece of paper when it was scanned. It was payment section and some thing else. I believe, this information is considered to be confidential and that's why they covered it. but, what if in covered information there is a key? What do you think, should I request the full copy?

47

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is is smart to contact the photographer about letters?

« on: August 02, 2011, 04:03:30 PM »

Helpi, the rules of this forum apply to you too. Please behave accordingly.

48

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Photographer responded to my email ....

« on: August 02, 2011, 04:01:49 PM »

we contacted the artist as well and that's what he answered:
"The contract that I signed with Masterfile is still valid and applies to all of my images held by Masterfile.  Copyright law applies to all pictures regardless of the medium (digital or other).  None of my pictures are public domain."
Also, there is a line in a contract that the artist that the artist warrants MF that he or she is the sole and exclusive owner of all stock images delivered to the company, and then there lines that the artist appoints the company as exclusive agent for sale  and licensing of the images,  grants full power and absolute authority to license the images, and the artist waives "moral rights" of all images (what does it mean? I do not completely understand). Then it is written that the copyright of all images is and will remain the exclusive property of the artist. But, this registration empowers the company to sue the infringers for statutory damages in the USA......
That's what was written in the agreement. So, it looks like the artist granted full authorization to sue on his behalf.
Every situation is different. If the poster's artist  said that Getty didn't own copyright, he might be right, but it needs to be checked what was written in the agreement, because if this is similar agreement, he authorized getty to sue of his behalf.
 And again - please calm down.

49

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is is smart to contact the photographer about letters?

« on: August 02, 2011, 03:22:57 PM »

It is getting hot here! I think everyone should stop fighting each other about who said what and to the address of whom. We all are here for a different purpose - try to share the information and experience, to discuss, educate and try to help "victims" of "legalized extortion". Don't forget it.
So, please calm down.
We all have opinions, and we all have rights for this. There are as many opinions as many people in the world. So, please respect each other. If you do not agree, just say that you do not agree and explain why, and that's it. This forum carries informative function.  Besides, there is no right or wrong opinion, it all depends on each particular situation.
The law has a lot of gaps in it, and there are some "grey areas", which can be read in different ways by parties. Am I right?
So, please calm down here.

50

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Lawsuits Filed

« on: August 01, 2011, 02:28:58 PM »

Thanks, SG! You are helpful, as usual

51

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Lawsuits Filed

« on: August 01, 2011, 12:15:50 PM »

Then, how to avoid the default judgement? let's  say, if a person is not able to hire an attorney, and he/she have no any idea how to fight the case, if he/she doesn't know anything about court procedures? There are so many factors that courts would consider, and it is really hard to build the defense without an attorney.
This question is interesting for me, I am new here in the country, and I am not ashamed to ask if I don't know smth. I say - hope for the best, but be ready for the worst.

52

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

« on: August 01, 2011, 12:02:51 PM »

It is just like reading my mind! I asked my husband to make an appointment at the Library of Congress and  actually see the image with our own eyes! I was in a right way then!

53

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile - in need of urgent advice

« on: August 01, 2011, 11:27:40 AM »

Thanks, Oscar! My husband has the claim from them for only one image. So, I believe, in our case it doesn't matter if they are registered as a compilation or not - it is still one infringement. Am I right?

54

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

« on: July 29, 2011, 02:21:50 PM »

yes, it seems like it was the same day when Matt and Oscar got the letter from his attorney. they are reading everything. btw, they revoked their offer to settle down for 1500 because of that
 SLAPP!!!!!

55

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

« on: July 29, 2011, 01:01:32 PM »

Matt, saying of confidentiality agreements. Masterfile blamed my husband that one of their emails to him was posted here on the forum, as they consider this confidential "not a good thing for us". The email doesn't have any secret information, private information, trade secrets, etc. There was no any confidentiality agreement written between my husband and Masterfile. Is this merit? This forum is for education purposes, that's why I used it.

56

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: yet another copyright troll

« on: July 29, 2011, 12:51:15 PM »

That's a great post, indeed.
So, if obviously, infringement trolls use the law for their business model and profit, how can we prove it then? We cannot just say the judge: hey please check where the most of their profit comes from - their sales and marketing activity or infringement demands.....Any ideas?
My point in all infringement stories is the following. It is not required by the law to put copyright sign or watermark, or to make it harder for users to copy the image without authorization(like right click of the mouse option). And they do not do this - that's their right, that's their choice. So, do they do anything to protect their images from infringement? And what do they do? Enforcing the fact of infringement when it happens and wanting full benefits from it? Is it fair?
For example, if I have my thing and I don't want my thing to be used by others . What do I do? I put a sign: don't use it! Right? Or put my name on it. Or remove it from public access. I do everything for protection and prevention, and not just say: "hey you used my thing, I don't care if you didn't know if it was mine, you used it so pay me!" Right?
I am not sure if what I have said is merit here. Any opinions?

57

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Just got my letter - I'm a fighter

« on: July 27, 2011, 09:34:18 PM »

Welcome to our club! And good luck with your fight!
If Getty really bring you to the court room, and if they win, then they may request you to pay their legal fees. So be careful, and do your homework first...

58

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

« on: July 27, 2011, 09:28:49 PM »

Gettyvictim120,
My sincere congratulations to your victory!

59

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

« on: July 27, 2011, 09:27:13 PM »

Nice joke for $9000!!!! They are insane!
The more I read things like this, the more I believe that the copyright law MUST be revised! If it will be left in the way as it is now, more and more emand letters will be produced! The government should limit the activity of these firms by requiring sending cease and desist letters first!
Please correct me if I am wrong.

60

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney Steven Weinberg contacts ELI on behalf of John MacDougall of Masterfile

« on: July 27, 2011, 08:52:52 PM »

Don't Give In,
I am fully agree with you. This forum is not intended for Masterfile, Getty etc., but for their victims. I also don't like that they browse posts here. I am sure that they will use it for their interests.....If it could be possible to block them! But of course, it wil not happen.
This forum is a great relief, people could find here support in their desperate situations. Everyone will agree that what Masterfile is doing is not that funny and pleasant, a least not for those who gets their demand letters. If this forum will be viewed and limited by Masterfile and its attorneys, people will lose their supports, hopes, we all will feel unsafe.
If Masterfile doesn't like that people try to fight them in what they are doing and how they are doing this - it is their own problem. But we all have our rights, too!
However, I do agree with Oscar and Matt that some posts can seem too offensive and rude to John, too.