Messages

511

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Can we just 'bottom line' this ?

« on: September 24, 2014, 10:55:58 AM »

see my replay above, if it's not password protected, it's accessible, simple as that. in this day and age the "stealing bandwidth" is just not an issue. I think a better way to look at is like this..Using your garden house..
scenario a: the house is locked, but you break the window and grab something...obviosly this would be breaking/entering, burglary etc.. or hacking.

scenario b: the house is locked, the windows are are locked, but the curtains are open, you peek in , have a look and leave..no harm no foul.

512

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Come to Join the Club

« on: September 24, 2014, 10:48:36 AM »

I have been looking at that case - I sent them a message, but as DavidvGoliath says, it probably won't make any difference.
The IP Lawyer didn't give me anything useful. Without saying too much, I have visited most lines of enquiry. I've been greeted with silence from some avenues - one is quite important and another I'm surprised at (identical use of feeds). I'm sat between my client and Gitty which isn't helpful.

did you really think you would get any good advice from an "IP attorney" who grabs images from google image searches in the first place...HUGE red flag that this so called attorney is not worth much..

513

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Fair Use Question

« on: September 20, 2014, 05:39:07 AM »

What is a "design element" in this case??

header, footer with logo, and perhaps the sidebar..clearly they are reaching.

514

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Letter on image now available for embedding and unsolicited email?

« on: September 17, 2014, 04:12:11 PM »

I was too naive to get this image from a "free image" site... lesson learned.

Lesson #2: NOTHING is FREE...beware of free image sites, as you have no clue where those "free" images are coming from.. ( In most cases)

515

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: CFAA Violation, TERMS of USE, Htacess Blocks

« on: September 17, 2014, 04:05:59 PM »

I'm liking this thinking as well!! One thing I will mention is that forget anything robots.txt.related, this file is simply a list of instructions for bots/spiders, ect... some clearly adhere to them, some clearly do not, and there is currently no law on the books regarding them, hence we go the extra steps of htaccess and blocking whole fracking counrty IP's

516

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: The Ending to it??

« on: September 17, 2014, 03:57:37 PM »

I'm not sure about UK law, but in the states, the statute of limitations is 3 yrs.. They can no longer harass you after that, and at that point it is perfectly within your rights to tell them to shag off..then again I suppose you could tell them that at any time..

517

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: "Dating Naked" contestant sues for not blurring her vagina and anus

« on: September 17, 2014, 03:55:16 PM »

This was just one of those legal things that jumped out as being a little on the weird side...so Matthew posted about it. I'm sure he knew where I would go with it, and he probably knew that some (Lucia) would bring valid points to the table..I'll try to behave as best I can..squirrel!!!

518

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: "Dating Naked" contestant sues for not blurring her vagina and anus

« on: September 17, 2014, 09:15:06 AM »

Vajayjay only implies if you are referencing one from India.

519

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Sconnie Nation: Sorry for partying not infringement!!

« on: September 16, 2014, 05:50:51 PM »

This should make Timmy cringe and re-ignite the fires under all the meme'rs out there.

Don't think for a minute, that I didn't see what you did right there...trying to bait me...shame on you..Thats it I'm leaving, going to play with photoshop!

520

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: "Dating Naked" contestant sues for not blurring her vagina and anus

« on: September 16, 2014, 05:48:57 PM »

Lucia said "vag"...I'm sorry I just find this whole thing humorous..then again I still find farts pretty funny too.

521

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Schneider Rothman IP Law v. Getty Images & Zemanta Lawsuit

« on: September 16, 2014, 12:18:39 PM »

I'm still trying to figure out why they didn't hire Attorney Timothy B. McCormack for this.

</snark>

1. Maybe they have inspirations of possibly winning?
2. Is Timothy B. McCormack a real lawyer or just a collection schlep?

522

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Schneider Rothman IP Law v. Getty Images & Zemanta Lawsuit

« on: September 14, 2014, 06:15:04 PM »

Oscar / Joel are free to use my case as another example, my 3 yrs is long gone, but as many of you know I purchased the images in question in good faith, showed Getty the license, but could not produce the receipt after more than 10 yrs.. But they still hounded me and also accused me of "creating" said license myself..all within 15 minutes of opening the Getty Images extortion letter. Oscar probably still has my documentation on file somewhere, if not i still have it.

523

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Sample replies? Best course of action to take?

« on: September 14, 2014, 06:11:08 PM »

also keep in mind that if YOU are the agent, DMCA will NOT be cover anything YOU post as the agent or the owner of the site, it only covers what other people post.

524

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Fair Use Question

« on: September 14, 2014, 07:18:43 AM »

""terms of this settlement offer shall be kept confidential..."

who the fuck is getty to tell you this!!! this only applies if you agree to it in writing...ntuarally when getty sees this, they will remove the 200.00 offer because Getty Images and the Likes of McCormack Law are douchebags.

525

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Abuse of Copyrright Law by Copyright Trolls & Bullies

« on: September 14, 2014, 07:07:37 AM »

This:

"Otherwise, there's almost a quarter million dollars fine for using someone's copyrighted or licensed work without their consent."

a. it's not a "fine" it would be a "judgement" 2 different things.
b. any reasonable judge would not award this amount for an "innocent" infringement.
c. As Lucia stated CC is not entirely trustworthy.