Messages

616

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got the letter ....A question and my plan....

« on: May 04, 2012, 02:54:30 PM »

mreams, here's a little tidbit for Canadians:

"Registration, while not necessary, provides certain presumptions that are useful if the copyright is litigated and prevents any person from relying on the defence of “innocent infringement” (i.e., where the infringer did not know and had no reason to suspect that copyright existed in the work). If there is no registration, an infringer who successfully proves the defence of innocent infringement could be prohibited from further copying but would not be liable for damages."

from page 66:
http://www.osler.com/uploadedFiles/News_and_Resources/Publications/Guides/Doing_Business_in_Canada_-_2011/DBIC-Chapter13.pdf

I don't think that Getty has registered anything in Canada.  So, you could claim "innocent infringement", and not even have to pay the retail value of the image.

ProTip: I think that Masterfile has retained Osler (the source of the above quote) in the past for litigation...

S.G.

617

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Judge: Facebook "Like" button doesn't count as "Free Speech"

« on: May 04, 2012, 01:39:34 PM »

Hey Buddhapi,

At first, I laughed my my ass off.
Then, I realized that you were serious, and learned something.
Wow.

S.G.

618

Legal Controversies Forum / Judge: Facebook "Like" button doesn't count as "Free Speech"

« on: May 04, 2012, 12:34:39 PM »

Judge: Facebook "Like" button doesn't count as "Free Speech"

the plaintiffs -- Bobby Bland, David Dixon, Robert McCoy, John Sandhofer and Debra Woodward -- said they were dismissed because before the election, they each "Liked" the Facebook campaign page of Roberts' opponent, Jim Adams... the court decided that whether or not Roberts knew his employees "Liked" the campaign page of his political opponent, their "Likes" still weren't considered free speech...

http://www.technolog.msnbc.msn.com/technology/technolog/does-your-facebook-count-free-speech-749433#

S.G.

619

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Jonathan Klein: Chief Executive Hypocrite & Bullshitter of Getty Images

« on: May 04, 2012, 02:04:58 AM »

Thanks for the vids and commentary.
I really laughed out loud when I saw the topic.  Lol'd hard.

But, I know that this is serious... This is how these idiots make their money.

They should rename "Getty Images" to "Jonestown Images".
Because he's obviously serving some funny tasting kool-aide at the offices of Getty, and the drones there are gulping it down.
But, I'm not.

S.G.

620

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 04, 2012, 12:19:09 AM »

If Roger Sterling got an "extortion letter", he'd laugh, show it to Don Draper (pour a stiff drink), ask Getty for proof and then sleep with the wife of Getty's CEO.

Lol.

S.G.

621

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: ELI Photo Gallery

« on: May 04, 2012, 12:15:05 AM »

Can we call it the "Copyright Troll Hall of Shame"?
Also, can we have a running vote on it for "worst troll"?

S.G.

622

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 03, 2012, 06:52:01 PM »

This is quite correct, Peeved.
Indeed, unless there's some "material fact" to prove that it's not the alleged infringer's website, or that they (Getty) don't represent the artist anymore, the accused will keep receiving extortion letters.

However, it appears to me that most folks seem quite compelled to write to Getty and argue their position.
So, if people want to write, my advice is to keep it to the minimum that I mentioned, and leave it at that.
That is, leave it at the point wherein they refuse to provide proof of their allegations and/or refuse a reasonable settlement.

S.G.

623

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: SuperStock Settlement Demand Letter

« on: May 03, 2012, 02:41:26 PM »

Everytime Getty loses in court, I'm gonna play "Wipeout" by the "The Surfaris" at top volume.


and dance like this:
http://portable.tv/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/pulp_fiction_dance-300x125.jpg

Like a Boss!!

S.G.

624

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 03, 2012, 02:15:52 PM »

Most regulars of the forum know that I'm not normally in favor of communicating with the trolls.

However, if people do choose to communicate with them, I feel that a professional "The image has been removed because of alleged copyright infringement claims"... then indicate that you may consider making a "reasonable offer" with the stipulation that they forward proof of an actual copyright infringement against Getty.

They'll tell you to "buzz off" when you ask for proof, and in doing so, they've ended any negotiations themselves, in spite of your efforts towards a reasonable offer.
Then, they've pretty much screwed themselves.

S.G.

625

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network files 2 more suits

« on: May 03, 2012, 02:09:20 PM »

Good post by McFilms.

My feeling is that it doesn't really matter in the end who "seeded" the images for free download.
The fact that H.A.N hasn't made any efforts to curtail it now or in the past is telling.
Furthermore, a lawsuit to collect "damages" from those posting the content as "free" would be more successful and effective... but they aren't doing that.
The mere fact that they're posted in hundreds of places for "free" is enough to dilute "standing" and practically nullify claims of "damages".

S.G.

626

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network files 2 more suits

« on: May 03, 2012, 11:21:29 AM »

Yes, it's always been about threats and scaring people into settling out of court for the most part.
It's obvious H.A.N. and Tylor actively "seed" their images as "free" all over the 'web.
Getty doesn't appear to do so themselves, but their CEO does encourage others to do so, as seen in the recent TechCrunch video.
So, I'd encourage people not to do Getty's dirty work.

S.G.

627

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network files 2 more suits

« on: May 02, 2012, 06:34:52 PM »

I didn't read the complaints... but if these are anything like the other H.A.N. lawsuits, it'll be pretty easy to defeat them.
I doubt that H.A.N. would "go the distance", court losses for them could end in bankruptcy.

Massive losses and bankruptcy were ok for Righthaven... they were an experiment by Stephens Media.
Their investment was expendable from day one in case the effort failed.
Not everyone can "bet the entire farm" on weak legal cases.

S.G. gives H.A.N's chances in court "the official thumbs down":
http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/4c236b057f8b9ae0490c0000/gladiator-thumbs-down.jpg

S.G.

628

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My company does not exist anymore

« on: May 01, 2012, 06:24:34 PM »

"KMT"'s story is interesting in that Getty's claim is completely contrary to what Getty's CEO Jonathan Klein said in an interview recently.
A direct quote from Klein is "where we do draw the line is when somebody is generating revenue (commercial revenue) on the back of our image".

http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/22/for-pinterest-revenue-will-turn-copyright-questions-into-problems/

So, Getty is a deceptive company.
While they may say verbally that people can use their images non-commercial applications without paying, I'm sure that they don't actually say that in their "terms of use".
Oscar has stated here on the forum that 90 percent of the cases that he deals with are in fact from non-commercial uses.

Getty runs the largest, most expensive and the most sophisticated image recognition/demand-letter program in human history.
However, its CEO has the gall to state "we don't stop consumers playing with our images, we don't stop kids from downloading our images to use in projects or for educational purposes... we don't stop the proliferation of imagery".

I'm quite certain that Getty isn't lying when its top man states that "we don't stop the proliferation of imagery".
In fact, it's in Getty's best (financial) interest that their images "proliferate" via Pinterest or via other conduits.
Because the casual nature of how images are "shared" actually generates copyright infringements.  That's money in the bank for Getty.

S.G.

629

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: My proposed Getty letter response and settlement offer

« on: May 01, 2012, 04:18:33 PM »

What a great letter... well done indeed...!

Here's my reaction when I read it:
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lx1y423DU91qjq4se.jpg

S.G.

630

P2P/BitTorrent Lawsuits Forum / The Pirate Bay must be blocked by UK ISPs, court rules

« on: April 30, 2012, 11:28:25 AM »

The Pirate Bay must be blocked by UK ISPs, court rules:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-17894176

Click here for a primer on "piracy vs. theft":
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/249/8809y.jpg/

S.G.