Messages

541

Getty Images Letter Forum / U.S. Copyright Office casual reading

« on: August 22, 2014, 12:29:16 PM »

For that want some casual reading this weekend, the U.S. Copyright Office released it's updated 1,222 page "Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition” yesterday.

http://copyright.gov/comp3/docs/compendium-full.pdf

542

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Techdirt Reports Getty Images Sued for Sending Extortion Letter to IP Law Firm!

« on: August 22, 2014, 10:10:15 AM »

Getty will be begging to settle this, and will probably state it was an honest mistake. Too bad they couldn't wait until they got the asshole Seattle Attorney Timothy B. Mccormack letter with the jacked-up demand account, and they could have gone after that fuck-wad as well.

543

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

« on: August 22, 2014, 08:42:39 AM »

gotta love that one tweet... they showed her "whole" vagina...yeah leave it to me..or is that leave it to beaver??.... : )

544

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 06:19:44 PM »

Umm, accusing someone of stealing something when it isn't stolen and then telling them to pay or else is extortion.  Lawyer or no lawyer.  Especially if he seeds images onto the internet in a fishing expedition.  I bet he also hacks into websites to plant images too. That's something the FBI would be very interested in.

And since when is $200 fair for a stupid picture on the internet?  He should go learn how to take his own pretty pictures and stop trying to harass, defame, and extort honest folks trying to make an honest living in a tight economy.  He's messing with my business and my food on the table because he is too lazy to do something and make the world a better place.  There's wars going on and all kinds of other stuff that is much more important than this petty crap.

did you license the image? I doubt it..

do you have PROOF he "seeded this image? I also doubt this has happened, or that you have proof.

are you aware by stating he hacks into websites, you could possibly be defaming the artist?
200.00 is the lowest amount a court would award for innocent infringement, which at this time based on your rantings would be a good deal, since it appears you did not bother to remove the image, which now makes this a "willful" infringement..and awards that could be much larger.

I do agree with your final statement, so maybe you should just pony up the money and we can all move on..

545

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 05:22:33 PM »

Most "reputable" web-hosts, will simply remove the offending image, s that is all they are required to do, Go-Daddy on the other hand has been known to simply pull the plug on entire domains, and I'm sure this is in their terms of service, buried in the fine print somewhere. The Op's original post as well as his following remarks, makes it very difficult to show any sympathy.. Chances are good if the image in question was removed in the first place, he may have never heard from the artist again, nor has his website pulled down..Just like DvG states, thats on him..

546

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 03:22:10 PM »

my final comment...an apt visual

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_li4cw2PmN91qap0t6o1_500.gif

547

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 02:02:39 PM »

@ DvG, sometimes it's impossible for some to see the forest, through the trees.. Carolyn Wright is an avid reader of ELI, would not surprise me one bit, if she has this all screen captured, and is considering contacting the artist.. That few hundred request, just might get a big larger now. and BTW, Dvg don't you ever consider taken a picture of a sunset, I've already done that!

548

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Anyone had a run-in with Sanders Law PLLC? Fair use?

« on: August 21, 2014, 12:20:44 PM »

It wasn't Sanders Law PLLC, it was a different group whose name escapes me?  Were you referring to Dan Levine's group?

Yeah I think it was Levine...there are just so many trolls, it's hard to keep track anymore..

549

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 12:13:24 PM »

So I tried google images on a few of his images, and some are all over the internet with no watermark.  Sounds like I'm not the one who needs to man up!!!  That's entrapment.  If he or any of his bottom feeding friends try to extort me again, I will report them to the police and their bar association.

good luck with that..gonna try one more time here..

1. the watermark has nothing to do with anything, it is NOT required.
2. because the image appears on other sites, means NOTHING, you would have to prove that the image was "seeded"
3.IF the photog sued you, you "MIGHT" be able to get away with innocent infringement, and pay the minimum of $200.00, but then you might also have to pay his attorney fees, and yours...much more than a couple of hundred bucks he's asking for now..
4. This is a photographer, so the bar association again has nothing to do with this..

550

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Anyone had a run-in with Sanders Law PLLC? Fair use?

« on: August 21, 2014, 11:21:31 AM »

Wasn't it Sanders that sent out the "recruiting" email to attorneys to get them on board of their trolling operation? I bet most of those lawyers are fresh out of law school, and were either musiicians, writers or "artists" of some sort..

551

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Tom Schwabel - copyright equivalent of Nigerian scam

« on: August 21, 2014, 11:06:39 AM »

I guess it's time for me to be a dick...the question is, if you can get a better image from istock for a couple of bucks, why didn't you?.. I think it would be in your best interest to get a little educated in regards to copyright..Hell there's a parking lot full of cars at the local walmart, maybe i'll just go get me one of them.. a "couple hundred bucks" seems fairly reasonable IF the photographer has his ducks in a row.

552

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network LLC v. Aloha Plastic Surgery update

« on: August 20, 2014, 06:03:22 PM »

All VKT and James Stephen Street's extortion victims and Aloha Plastic Surgery should follow this case from the Pacer archives.  Michael Pasquale put up a hell of a fight.

I am amazed how a revisit of Pacer reveals that Michael Pasquale single-handedly set aside the default judgement that James Stephen Street attempted to get for Hawaiian Art Network. I never saw it done before prior to this.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/237344651/Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Sets-Aside-Default-Judgment-from-Hawaiian-Art-Network

Kudos to Michael for teaching us this.

Classic newspaper headline:

"Breast enhancement doctor, beats down seasoned copyright-troll attorney/ Paint by numbers artist J Stephen Street single-handedly"

553

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network v. Aloha Plastic Surgery Lawsuit Settled

« on: August 20, 2014, 05:58:32 PM »

It is so convenient for these free wallpaper websites to distribute VKT photos and when someone is dumb enough to get one of those images.  The Hawaiian Trio of Tylor/Street/Anderson make out like bandits from the free wallpaper scheme.

You can bet your ass that Hawaiian copyright attorney troll J. Stephen Street and that other douchebag VK Tylor ( Vincent Tylor from Landmark Hawaiian Images) are not taking any action to have these "free" wallpaper images removed, there are still plenty of those sites hosted with go-daddy alive and well today.. I won't get into who VK Tylor is teaching his son the trolling ropes as well, but I think there is another thread already started here about that..

554

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Infringement Claim

« on: August 19, 2014, 06:33:18 PM »

Heres some info that you need to look into..the photo site is a canadian company. so they would need to sue you in your state ( highly unlikely).. You need to find out the following.

is the image registered with the US copyright office?
if so to whom?
when was it registered? was it before or within 3 months from the date of the first letter?
does picscout have an exclusive contract to attempt to collect payment on alledged infringements?
is the image available on other stock image sites?
is the image available on free download ( screen saver sites)
does the photographer sell the image on their own site
does the photographer has an exclusive contract with designpics?


getting this info will help you decide how to move forward.

555

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Infringement Claim

« on: August 19, 2014, 06:24:03 PM »

they sent an email! bottom line is they don't even know if they sent it to a legimate address, email is certainly not a way to handle legal matters.. I would not be surprised if Getty does not own this company as well, hell they own a bunch of other srock site already, in addition to picscout.. a simple search of corporate records would tell us who owns what.