Messages

511

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a Masterfile / My web designer is stating they are not responsible

« on: December 17, 2011, 05:06:38 PM »

Frankly I am disappointed to hear that the developer did not step up and assist you. I think you will have to sue him in small claims court for the full amount. I also wouldn't be shy about identifying this developer, because that behavior is totally unprofessional.  If you decide to go that route, I guess the best course of action would be to advise MF that is what you intend to do. Ask them for proof that they have registered the images and ask them for details on how they arrived at this price. (It would also be worth it for you to double check if these images are available from them or else where as "royalty free" and not "rights managed.")

As much as I deplore some of the tactics the stock companies are using, web developers that leave clients' totally holding the bag are even worse.

512

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Shuts Down Server without DMCA Complaint

« on: December 16, 2011, 07:10:59 PM »

mattwmc2001 -- are you saying GoDaddy never emailed you a take-down notice? If I were you I would check and see if Warner Brothers actually filed a DMCA claim.

I am more interested in the original poster's story that started this thread. If what he says is accurate, then Masterfile could have caused not only his site, but the sites of up to 10 clients' sites to be taken down. There could certainly be some loss of revenue or maybe even the loss of clients due to this action. If this happened due to a bogus DMCA filing, then he should have pursued damages.

I wish bwd was still active on this board.

513

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Picscout / DMCA question

« on: December 14, 2011, 08:58:28 PM »

Meanwhile on the web... It looks like the ELI site isn't the only group fed up with the antics of PicScout:

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1105828&highlight=getty

It seems the rapid-fire manner in which PicScout is spidering some sites is tantamount to a DoS attack. One person even had his server go down.

I noticed that group is considering contacting members of the media.

514

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: List of Public Domain stock footage companies

« on: December 14, 2011, 05:31:33 PM »

I found another source for clip art and cartoon images at:
http://www.wpclipart.com/

The owner of the site seems pretty "on it" when it comes to verifying that the images are in the public domain. Hi FAQ page tells why he does not offer legle indemnification: "Folks have been known to sue (or more often threatened to sue) even if they do not have a legitimate claim."

Anyway, just another resource to add to the list.

515

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Picscout / DMCA question

« on: December 13, 2011, 07:06:01 PM »

I have largely stayed away from this conversation because I didn't get it. I couldn't see how violating robots.txt broke any laws. Lucia, thank you so much for bringing clarifying that spoofing the user agent may violate some laws. Also for providing a clear, succinct breakdown of what a visiting spider looks like and what it does.

I'm still not fond of developers having to "hide" from picscout. But I understand how some people would want to slam the door in the face of this intrusion. 

516

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Resolution of Getty v. Advernet (A blow to Getty & Stock photo companies)

« on: December 13, 2011, 03:23:23 AM »

SoylentGreen I know I have been stressing 1 to 3 on your list. But I don't recall stressing #4.

517

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: December 12, 2011, 10:40:25 PM »

Great! I hope this video touches on some of the things the victims might do. When can they start billing HAN for attorney costs? What steps do they need to take to ensure that they are in the best position to recoup any expenses from HAN? Any thoughts or information why this one photographer's image is at the center of so many letters?

Thanks! I'll be sure to tune in.

518

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Artwork, LLC Files Lawsuit!

« on: December 12, 2011, 10:35:30 PM »

Smitty -- Are you in the US or Canada? Did you see all the other posts by people targeted by this particular photographer and stock agency? You should all compare notes. Did you also catch that post that the image in question is available as a print for $10?

If it were me I would offer the $10 without admitting any guilt but in the interest of moving on. They obviously won't accept that, but in the highly unlikely case this were to go in front of a judge, you could say you made an effort to settle the matter at the going rate. My understanding isd that this puts you in the position to have them pay for all of your court costs when the judge throws it out of court.

519

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: December 09, 2011, 02:17:05 PM »

Man, I was so ready for that Hawaiian vacation I was already thinking about posting one of these baitpapers on my site.

Okay, no free trip to Hawaii, but I stand by the rest of my statement. I honestly believe that an individual without an attorney could successfully argue and win this case. Seriously. (And yes I know the adage about "A person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client."

520

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: December 09, 2011, 01:32:31 PM »

Based on this information, my opinion is, if you pay HAN anything you are a sucker.

I understand that they have filed suit in a couple of cases. I guess they feel no one in the lower 48 is going to fly to Hawaii to appear and they will win default judgments. But if it were me, I'd take it to the mat and fight. It seems very likely that HAN would end up paying for my trip to Hawaii.

521

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Too all webmasters, do you recall this Getty traffic source?

« on: December 06, 2011, 06:44:49 PM »

This is one area I slightly disagree with the majority. I don't think you should have to lay low or hide. Trust me, if they want to find your mailing address, they can. I think you should choose to communicate in the manner you prefer. I choose e-mail because it was easier for me. I requested that they acknowledge receipt of my e-mail. I figured as long as I kept engaging the lawyer I was racking up their billable hours. Maybe it wouldn't break the stock company, but it would put more of a ding in their pocketbook then a stamp.

I also think it is a worthwhile pursuit to continue to require documentation, letters, request information, question facts -- all while ignoring their arbitrary "deadlines." These deadlines are basically meaningless anyway. But as long as you keep the issue in play (even when you get a severe "Final Notice") you can always say that you were making an effort to negotiate. Let them be the one's to stop communicating.

And by the way, marking an email as spam from your email client will not "bounce' it in the way that a blocked IP would anyway. But why should you have to spend time blocking them anyway? It all seems counter productive to me.

Anyway that's my measly 2¢.

522

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My 1st Copyright Letter

« on: December 06, 2011, 06:21:16 PM »

kyke -- I didn't catch your post the first time through.

I know it gets pretty nerve wracking when these firms start talking about the tens of thousands you will be libel for, I've been there. But as long as people keep rolling over, they will keep doing it. If what you say is accurate, I don't see how they have a case. I posted this in another thread, but I wanted to re-iterate it in the context of your situation.

Here are some questions I would ask them in the next letter:

Is this photo registered the copyright for the image at the US copyright office?
Can they provide you with proof of registration?
Are they aware that numerous web sites are representing their images as "free" or "free to download and use"?
If so, what action has client taken to stop them?
Although they showed a screenshot from Getty Images for some other image, how did they arrive at the valuation of this image? (Remind them that iStockphoto offers images in that size for $5 and the site you obtained that image from was free.)
Ask them what relationship do they have with the site that hosted that image.

To me you are well within your rights to require this information prior to any talk of a "settlement." You've seen first hand how easy it is for someone to misrepresent the rights they have to an image and you don't want it to happen again.

For your part, be sure to document everything. Screenshots and urls of the site you got the image from, but also the other ones offering it for free. Many people on this site have indicated to me that they suspect HAN may be behind seeding these images to the wallpaper sites in the hopes of doing exactly what they are doing now. No one has been able to provide me with proof of that yet. However the images they represent do seem to show up on a remarkable number of "wallpaper" sites and strangely we have no evidence of them asking those sites to stop.

Bottom line, don't panic. As you educate yourself you will learn that many people have gone through this already.

523

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another letter from IMUA Legal Advisors

« on: December 06, 2011, 06:09:11 PM »

buddhapi,

You are absolutely right. If IMUA Legal Advisors wants to protect their photographer's rights, one would think they would promote the honest exchange of information. Instead it seems they want to hide these letters from public view.

I know Matt will continue to dispute these silly DMCA take-down notices. Preventing someone from posting a letter in the context of education and information is a pretty severe First Amendment violation. I hope Scribd will continue to side by him and once all parties comply with the provisions in DMCA, the documents will become available again.

524

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network LLC's list of Lawyers Used Thus Far

« on: December 05, 2011, 05:46:43 PM »

Two other thoughts:

First on another thread you said the image was uploaded by a student for a site that was non commercial. Sounds like fair use to me, but I don't know the specifics.

Second -- Just a thought for those that are following along -- I wonder if it would be possible to get any one of those 150 sites that offered that image to reveal the identity (or even the ip) of the original uploader. Because if it were uploaded to the site by the photographer of his representative and then they threatened to sue for it's use... wouldn't that be fraud?

525

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network LLC's list of Lawyers Used Thus Far

« on: December 05, 2011, 05:36:17 PM »

Some questions for the H.A.N. lawyer:

Has client registered the copyright for the image at the US copyright office?
Can they provide you with proof of registration?
Is client aware that numerous web sites are representing their images as "free" or "free to download and use"?
If so, what action has client taken to stop them?

To me you are well within your rights to require this information prior to any talk of a "settlement." You've seen first hand how easy it is for someone to misrepresent the rights they have to an image and you don't want it to happen again.

For your part, be sure to document everything. Screenshots and urls of the site you got the image from, but also the other ones offering it for free. Many people on this site have indicated to me that they suspect HAN may be behind seeding these images to the wallpaper sites in the hopes of doing exactly what they are doing now. No one has been able to provide me with proof of that yet. However the images they represent do seem to show up on a remarkable number of "wallpaper" sites and strangely we have no evidence of them asking those sites to stop.