Messages

466

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Questions about my upcoming battle

« on: June 15, 2012, 03:00:00 PM »

Just few quick comments.

The less that you say the better.  I don't like the sound of the whole "crafting letters" thing.
The more that you write or talk, the more responsibility that you're taking for this alleged infringement.
You need to understand that they don't care what you write, they just want your money and they'll keep at you.

I still don't understand how your website has been connected with your employer, or why your employer receives a couple of letters per year.
It's nice of your boss to help you assume responsibilty for the infringement, and to steer Getty right in your direction.
Make sure that you tell Getty when you're home so that they can deliver a lawsuit to you. lol.

I don't think that you're handling this properly.  But, it's your money, not mine.

S.G.

467

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: NASA? Or Masterfile?

« on: June 14, 2012, 02:00:07 PM »

Yes, this was touched on before.  I think that it was McFilms, and a few examples were provided.
I think that Getty runs a couple of photoshop filters on the images, to enhance them.
I figure that it's also done to give them cause to state "copyright Getty".

S.G.

468

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Special ELI Video Updates with Oscar Michelen

« on: June 14, 2012, 01:21:44 PM »

The subject of complaints to the bar about rogue lawyers was touched on briefly in the video.

I think that it's helpful for most to be "afraid of the boss" a little bit.
"The boss" could be the person that hired you, your father-in-law, or even your customer.
In this case, I'm referring to the bar association/law society, of course.

It's rather unfortunate that a significant number of lawyers in this arena have essentially become "collection agents".
Most lawyers hired by the trolls have been misrepresenting facts and evidence in order to coerce larger and quicker settlements.
The only reason that a lawyer would do this is to compensate for the fact that their client really doesn't have a case and as such has no right to collect monies.

I know that the law industry tends to "stick together", and there's a certain camaraderie.
But, a significant line has been crossed wherein some lawyers lie both outright and by omission for clients that say that they've been wronged but actually haven't been.
For example, it's an outright lie for a lawyer to write to a person and say "you have infringed on my client's copyright, and you must compensate my client" when the client owns no such copyright.
In such an event, the lawyer is making money on the basis of this lie.
How is this any different than completely fabricating a legal case and demanding that the victim make their check payable to the lawyer's escrow account?

In addition, I've noted that there's a slight tendency to blame the victims at times.
But, the concept of "you should have known that this is a fraud", should not lessen the onus on lawyers and even their clients to be truthful.

It is nice to see that the extortion letters have been changing in a positive way, probably due solely to the fact that people have been submitting official complaints.

S.G.

469

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: NASA? Or Masterfile?

« on: June 14, 2012, 12:30:23 PM »

They could be NOAA or military, also.
This kind of reminds me of how Getty licenses historic photos that have fallen into public domain after the copyright has expired after many decades.

S.G.

470

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: How can you tell if you have Getty Images on your site?

« on: June 14, 2012, 12:27:36 PM »

Good point by McFilms.
If their application says that you're "clean", that could be a problem for Getty.
Of course, there's probably verbage in the license agreement that says that Getty's not responsible for false results.

Anyway, I admire those who had the guts to install this malware turd.
I'd set up a sandbox and try it... but that seems like a lot of work.

S.G.

471

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Class action suit filed against “Getty Images Master Delegate” in Israel.

« on: June 13, 2012, 04:46:45 PM »

Wow!!  This is big news!!
One can really see how this parallels Getty's extortion letter program on this continent also.

S.G.

472

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Special ELI Video Updates with Oscar Michelen

« on: June 13, 2012, 04:41:15 PM »

Great videos, and well balanced commentary.  Also I got a few mentions!
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/1521/reactionohgoshmy.jpg

I think that the "cringe-worthy" comment from Oscar was fair.  I can say that if I was in his position, I would feel the same way.

On the other hand, the marketing of ideas, concepts and opinions is quite a sophisticated thing.
While some may see some of the more low-brow content as being done exclusively for humor or spite, there's an aspect of this that's actually quite legitimate.
Much of the copyright trolling has never been based on valid interpretations of law, real evidence, or even reasonable damages.
It's rarely a "legal" or "court fight". So, it's actually a very effective tactic to present the bad guys as evil, incompetent, even ugly buffoons.
It lowers their image publicly while raising the morale of our side.
Anyone familiar with political campaigns or other propaganda knows what I'm talking about.

But, it just depends on your position, and world view.

Here's a "clean" example or "war" propaganda:
http://www.mahablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/vintage-war-propaganda-posters08.jpg
But, there are many examples that are racist, or even quite sexual.

S.G.

473

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Settlement & Release Agreement

« on: June 12, 2012, 11:23:29 PM »

Looks like an infringement of one image?
But, it'll take six payments to pay it off... and look at the length of the blacked out settlement value.
It takes up a whole line.

S.G.

474

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images Extortion Letter with Sales Tax

« on: June 12, 2012, 09:05:09 PM »

I recall that more than one forum contributor has mentioned this previously.
I especially recall a couple of demands in EU wherein a VAT tax demanded.
So, I think that they've been trying this out for a while.
What a bunch of crooked assholes.

S.G.

475

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Questions about my upcoming battle

« on: June 12, 2012, 02:00:13 PM »

Funny... I can see the image.
Let's try again:

http://fumaga.com/i/sadimir-putin.jpg

S.G.

476

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Questions about my upcoming battle

« on: June 12, 2012, 01:42:18 PM »

I'm glad that McFilms is still here...
...otherwise I'd be:

http://www1.skoftenmedia.com/images/picdump/166/38.jpg

S.G.

477

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Questions about my upcoming battle

« on: June 12, 2012, 10:32:56 AM »

This is one of those subjects that's a bit delicate.

If it was me, I'd see if I could get the front desk secretary to mail a note to Getty on company letterhead stating that it's the wrong address.
Additionally, I'd ensure that no current address of the extortion victim was forwarded.  Keep a copy of this.
If Getty continued its actions, it could be liable for HUGE damages.  In the millions.  They could be liable already.
The employee could now allege that any near term career hurdles were due to Getty's harassment.

In any case, Getty blew it.  The victim in this situation now has a case against Getty.
If push comes to shove, all he needs to do is threaten legal action because they contacted his employer, and this will disappear.

But, that's just me.

S.G.

478

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Questions about my upcoming battle

« on: June 11, 2012, 11:47:38 PM »

Lol'd at this one.
Maybe you can "lay low"?
If they sent demands to the wrong address, then I'd hardly say that you're obligated to respond.
I wouldn't write or call them and give them the "correct" contact info, either.

S.G.

479

Legal Controversies Forum / Canadian beer company learns harsh lesson in social media after legal threat

« on: June 11, 2012, 12:09:16 PM »

Canadian beer company learns harsh lesson in social media after legal threat
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/06/05/magnotta-photo-flap-labatt-learns-a-harsh-lesson-in-social-media/

Labatt Breweries quickly learned a brutal lesson in social media marketing and PR after a legal threat against the Montreal Gazette, over the paper’s use of a photo depicting accused killer Luka Magnotta holding a bottle of Blue, transformed into a Twitter backlash mocking the beer company.

S.G.

480

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty From Start To Finish

« on: June 10, 2012, 11:53:38 AM »

Copyright may subsist in various parts of printed materials.
For example, my company might choose to create a brochure which would be copyright "my company".
However, I might have licenced images for use in the document.  I've licensed them for use, but the owner still retains copyright.

It's common that Getty doesn't own the actual copyright of the images that it retails, and therefore couldn't legally collect much damages.
So, that's probably your best bet.

S.G.