Messages

616

P2P/BitTorrent Lawsuits Forum / Re: Canadian firm monitoring illegal downloading for court cases

« on: May 13, 2013, 07:51:43 AM »

that is a good find on the article SG. I would like to read more about it do you have any links to the articles?

617

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A note on photos that are "public domain"

« on: May 12, 2013, 10:11:17 PM »

Agreed, you can never be complete sure of any image anymore unless you take it yourself.  The image Getty sent me a letter over was on a persons website and that person put their name on it with a title making it look as if it was their own image and offered it in a public directory.  I have screen captures of 4 pages of Google search results of people who have used this image and accredited it to this person as I did and these are just the people who knew enough that you should give the (supposed) author credit for the image they are letting you use.

I thought I was very careful Now I will only use my own images.

618

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images files suit over single image

« on: May 08, 2013, 09:17:14 PM »

It is more than that Robert, in 2009 Lisa Willmer stated that Getty finds about 42,000 cases of infringement a year.  That was 2009, with Pic-Scout and other aides I imagine it is a lot more now. 

You figure in the past Getty averaged about 1 suit per year whick equals 0.002%.  This is a number so close to 0 it I don't think it matters, now figure of the 0.002% how many cases the actually got a favorable ruling, I state it like this because of cases like Advernet where it was a win (by default) but it was ruled they got nothing because there were so many problems with registrations they were not entitled to collect.

So in my opinion I think the terms fraud, legalized extortion and the like are still in play and valid.

619

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Settlement demand for images from an RSS feed (gettyimages)

« on: May 07, 2013, 12:27:47 PM »

That is great news that they have decided to close your case, congratulations! Do not be too surprised at the grammar from Getty's Compliance Specialist as in my opinion they don't seem to be the type that other corporate entities are trying to steal away.

620

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty and Jupiter Images

« on: May 06, 2013, 10:11:17 PM »

Edward,

I can only go by what you have told me in from what you said at the time you purchased it you were basically granted unlimited use of the image. What is even better you say you have a copy of the agreement so it seems to me and Oscar can correct me if I am wrong that that contract should be binding since it predates anything Getty may have changed when they acquired the company. You should be grandfathered in on the images you purchased.

Contrary to what Getty will tell you it is ultimately up to them to prove you have infringed. Again, I would let them know that their harassment is not welcome. I would reply to Mr. McCormack and send a copy to Getty letting them know the images were purchased legally and you have the agreement and if they wish you to send it to them you would be willing to do so but will bill them for your time and inconvenience. I would make the bill is outrageous as Gettys invoice to you was. I would also let them know you consider the matter closed and if you receive any further communication other than to request and pay for the above-mentioned information you will file complaints with all the agencies I stated in my previous message.

I find it very interesting Getty requires you to provide proof you have purchased these images legally, which I do not find an unreasonable request yet when the roll is reversed and anyone request proof Getty has the exclusive rights they claim before continuing negotiations on a settlement the letter recipient is told that this information would only be provided during discovery, in other words when they sue.

If it comes to filing the complaint letters I would be sure to emphasize this fact.

Hope this helps and please keep us posted as to what you do and the results.

621

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty and Jupiter Images

« on: May 06, 2013, 08:07:38 PM »

If you bought a license that gave you those rights and have the print out then you should be fine.  Have you sent this to Getty in a letter explaining it?  If not I would send a letter to McCormack and CC Getty Images letting them know this and if the continue to send you letters you will file complaints against both of them with the Washington State Attorney Generals Office, the BBB, the FTC and your Congressman and Senator.  In addition I would also let Mr. McCormack know if you receive anymore letters after you explain this you will also file complaints with the Washington, Idaho and Oregon State Bar Associations (where he is licensed to practice law).

622

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Letter Received But No Such Image

« on: May 03, 2013, 10:02:59 PM »

I would agree with Jerry, if this is the case I would just ignore them.

623

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Settlement demand for images from an RSS feed (gettyimages)

« on: May 02, 2013, 09:02:18 PM »

HAHAHAHA   

Of course, I agree with Lucia.

My assertion is simply that Getty may legally accuse somebody of copyright infringement.
That's not a "crime" or "extortion".

In fact companies and people accuse each other of legal transgressions every day.
Somebody's always right, and somebody's always wrong.  But, the accusation itself isn't a "crime", or "fraud".

Now, if some actual material facts were misrepresented, somebody paid, that person could prove such, AND they didn't sign a confidentiality agreement, they MIGHT have a case against Getty.

...and yes, I know where this is going... and it's a waste of everybody's time.

S.G.

I don't think anyone has brought this up before. But what about a class action suit.


HAHAHAHAA! (Sorry S.G., I couldn't resist.)

624

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Settlement demand for images from an RSS feed (gettyimages)

« on: May 01, 2013, 07:30:08 PM »

It just shows that Getty and their employees really don't care and are not interested in the protection of their artists IP rights but only in their business model. 

625

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Time for Patent Reform: Key Lawmakers Take Aim at Trolls

« on: April 30, 2013, 07:47:48 PM »

They are going after patent trolls because they hurt big business.

Patience my friend, soon very soon now......

626

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images in Canada

« on: April 30, 2013, 03:40:19 PM »

Hi seoulite and welcome to the forums.  I am one of the ones who advocate sending at least one letter.  Lucia is correct that you want to make sure that the images is the correct images and if it is I would want to know that Getty has the rights they claim to have.  It has been shown in court that this is not always the case, also if Getty should take you to court you can show that you were trying to negotiate with them.  I also believe in making a fair and reasonable offer, but contingent on them providing proof. This to is good if you should go to court.....Judge, I told them I would negotiate and offered a settlement and all I asked for was proof of claim in light of their past history, they refused and took me to court.  Would not look to good for them would it?

If they refuse to cooperate and refuse to drop the matter I also advocate filing complaints with your equivalent of the Attorney General, BBB and FTC.

@ SG and/or Bernicem77 what are the Canadian equivenalts of the AG, BBB and FTC?

I hope this helps and please keep us posted as to your progress.

627

Legal Controversies Forum / Time for Patent Reform: Key Lawmakers Take Aim at Trolls

« on: April 29, 2013, 07:37:42 PM »

Here is a good article from our friends over at the EFF.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/time-for-patent-reform-key-lawmakers

628

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: failed to load page: Some regulars blocked

« on: April 29, 2013, 11:52:41 AM »

it did that to me a couple of nights ago. I know that if I went directly to the forums let's go to the homepage I could still get in. I will email Robert and let him know there are still issues.

629

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Complaint with BBB

« on: April 25, 2013, 10:19:27 PM »

I remember in one of the letters Getty sent me they told me to log on to their website and view the image and that is all the proof I need. 

The image in question was still displayed on the webpage where I got it at the time of this letter and still appeared to belong to the owner of that webpage(had put his name on the picture and given the picture a title too). I told Getty something like if seeing an image on a website is proof then I will take a picture of your building and place it on my website.  I will send you a bill for rent due and if you question that my claim that I own your building is valid please go to my website and look at the picture of your building there and that is all the proof you will need.  

630

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Help checking image registration

« on: April 23, 2013, 12:31:20 AM »

Copyright exists from the moment the photograph is taken whether the image is registered or not. If the image is not registered  or registered properly then all that can be sought is actual damages which is not worth going to court in most cases as it will cost more that Getty would get in most cases.  If the image is registered properly and Getty has an exclusive contract done properly Getty can then pursue statutory damages, the up to 150,000 they like to scare people with.  Getty does not in most cases have this done.  They do have 3 months from the time an infringement is discovered to register the images properly if they intend to sue and still be able to claim statutory damages.

Getty has learned from their Advernet fiasco as with their two recent lawsuits  on images that were not registered properly they are registered them now but only asking actual damages on those images and statutory damages on the ones that were registered at the time of the infringement.