Messages

646

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: NCS letters

« on: January 20, 2016, 07:15:53 AM »

FDCPA only applies to debt collection issues not copyright claims which is what they are attempting to do.

Historically, NCS IP Solutions don't really do anything except send letters. At some point, they will punt it back to Getty.

You will not stun them into silence. It is simply a matter of disregarding the letters if you don't feel you should pay.

647

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: EFF will be doing "copyright week" Jan 19-22

« on: January 08, 2016, 08:40:08 PM »

I just had a conversation with someone in the EFF also about a different matter. However, the news you are sharing is very interesting indeed.

Possibly of interest to folks: EFF.org will be doing a whole series on copyright law, discussing trolling of various types from Jan 19-22.  Seems like something worth tuning in for.  I had a good conversation with their team last week and they tell me they are also actively working on influencing legislation to, among other things, reform statutory minimums for infringements and other troll-friendly problems with the law. I don't have any real details on that but hopefully there will be good discussion later this month!

648

Getty Images Letter Forum / New York Public Library Releases Huge Collection of Public Domain Images

« on: January 07, 2016, 04:08:04 AM »

For people who are interested in free public domain images.

http://www.nypl.org/blog/2016/01/05/share-public-domain-collections

649

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: License Compliance Services Inc. (LCS) provokes EFF to get involved.

« on: January 07, 2016, 03:43:12 AM »

And this is why we are all united here at ELI.  WE are the frontline force for the day-to-day cause-fight regarding Getty, LCS, and its ilk. We aren't the EFF but then the EFF can't be all things to all people.

That is an awesome letter, I am sad to say that this behavior will continue, Getty a.k.a LCS has learned all they have to do is dismiss the claim and keep going after the low hanging fruit. The won't be taken to court because they dismissed the claim, even though they have shown they will continue to harass and bully people for payment until they educate themselves and fight back.

650

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: License Compliance Services Inc. (LCS) provokes EFF to get involved.

« on: January 07, 2016, 03:40:03 AM »

They are very selective about cases they take on. They tend to take cases that make a wide impact benefiting many vs. single parties.

I'm very happy to see EFF getting involved in this issue.  They seem to be one of the few organizations powerful enough to start changing copyright law with regards to image trolls.

651

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Should LCS Get IT's Own Forum?

« on: January 07, 2016, 03:37:39 AM »

Anything is possible. However, I consider LCS to be part of the the "Getty extortion family".  Lots of overlapping information. I will add LCS as part of the description for the Getty Forum.

Matthew,

With all the activity we are seeing from LCS do you think they should get their own heading like McCormack did to make it easier for the LCS letter recipients to find the LCS threads?  Just a thought.

652

Getty Images Letter Forum / License Compliance Services Inc. (LCS) provokes EFF to get involved.

« on: December 23, 2015, 08:07:28 PM »

WE have been reporting on Getty Images for years. More recently, we have been giving LCS exposuree since LCS is nothing more than a division of Getty Images. It looks like this time around they have provoked the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) into getting involved by hitting the wrong victim.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/12/eff-responds-after-license-compliance-services-attacks-fair-use

Getty Images & LCS are notoriously sloppy staffed by hourly clerks pretending to be knowledgeable and infallible. They continue to provoke the wrong people.  Glad to see the EFF speak out against LCS.

Please note their position. They want copyright reform. As we have said for years, the copyright law was never designed for the Internet age or small or "de minimus" infringements. It is regularly abused by the copyright extortionists such as LCS.

Their response letter may assist others who receive copyright extortion letter.

============

Samantha Clemens
License Compliance Services, Inc.
605 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104

RE: Case No. 379786452

BY EMAIL: LC [email protected]

Dear Ms. Clemens:

I write in response to License Compliance Services, Inc.'s (LCS) emails of November 24, 2015 and December 3, 2015 regarding a thumbnail image that appeared on the website http://uoah.org/. The Electronic Frontier Foundation represents Robert Knox, who created and runs that website. In your messages, LCS demands that our client pay LCS for his use of an image of a kidney. LCS makes this demand even though our client's site made a clear fair use of the photograph under 17 U.S.C. § 107. Please be advised that our client will not comply with your demand, and has no obligation to do so.

Mr. Knox created The Universal Organization for the Advancement of Humanity (UOAH) and its website to highlight humanist causes such as global health and education. This website includes a news ticker where Mr. Knox collates links to news articles relevant to these topics. Each item includes a headline that links directly to the original article, a very brief summary written by Mr. Knox (usually less than ten words), and a thumbnail image from the original page. This is classic fair use. See generally Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 336 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2003).

The UOAH website collects news to highlight positive developments in human rights, education, and health. The site, which in addition to this information includes links to academic resources and non-profit organizations, serves as an educational resource for visitors. Its limited use of headlines and thumbnails to link to news articles serves the clear transformative purposes of education and commentary. See Kelly, 336 F.3d at 818¬22 (use of thumbnail images in search engine fair use); Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605; 609-12 (2d Cir. 2006) (reproduction, at reduced-size, of posters in book was transformative). As such, the first statutory fair use factor—the nature of the use—strongly favors fair use.

The other fair use factors also strongly support Mr. Knox. The second factor—the nature of the copyrighted work—supports fair use because the photo had already been published and was being used primarily in a factual manner. See, e.g., Katz v. Google Inc., 802 F.3d 1178, 1183 (11th Cir. 2015). The third factor—amount used—also favors Mr. Knox because the use of a thumbnail-sized image is no more than necessary to allow "users to recognize the image and decide whether to pursue more information about the image or the originating web site." Kelly, 336 F.3d at 821.

Finally, the fourth factor—market harm—strongly favors our client. The UOAH website is plainly not a substitute for the original news articles or photographs as it includes only the headline, a few words of summary, and a thumbnail image. It is well-settled that thumbnails do not serve as a substitute for photographic works. See Kelly, 336 F.3d at 821-22. Indeed, as the Ninth Circuit explained, a thumbnail paired with a link to a source page guides any interested visitors toward a licensed, full-size copy of the photograph. See id. at 821. Far from operating as a substitute for the original work, it actively promotes it.

LCS's messages not only failed to rebut Mr. Knox's claim of fair use but misstated the law. In LCS's second email, you wrote that, to qualify as fair, a use must "meet all factors of Fair Use" (emphasis added). But, it is well-established that a party need not prevail on every factor to establish fair use. See, e.g., Norse v. Henry Holt & Co., 847 F. Supp. 142, 145 (N.D. Cal. 1994). LCS also implied that our client's use of the image could not qualify as fair use because it was not licensed. But it is well-settled that fair use does not require permission or any kind of license. See Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 585 n.18 (1994). It is extremely disappointing that LCS would misstate the law when making monetary demands of individuals. We hope that this was not done with the intent to bully a person you expected to be unfamiliar with the law.

Although his use of the image was fair and no changes to the UOAH website were required, Mr. Knox has already removed the thumbnail image from his site. This change was made in a spirit of compromise and was not required by the law. LCS has nonetheless demanded that Mr. Know pay for his prior fair use of the image. As explained above, Mr. Knox's use of the image not an infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 107 and he owes you nothing.

We trust that LCS will respect our client's right to free speech and will not trouble a court of law with this matter. If you wish to discuss Mr. Knox's website further, you may contact me.

Daniel K. Nazer
Staff Attorney

653

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Just an introduction and a Thank You

« on: December 23, 2015, 06:03:04 PM »

Hey, I like ELItes! Never heard that from anyone before!

And your welcome. Glad there are people who appreciate what we do.

You make an important observation about the need for us being around as a future resource. Oscar and I have never engaged in the hard sell of what we do. How we started ELI was getting the word out, educating others, and create goodwill.

But the underlying fact is that both of us are business people and without some degree of financial or goodwill support (through various means and channels) we could not easily continue. For example, Robert (Buddhapi) donates his time and his hosting services to ELI. He is also an assistant moderator/administrator when I am unavailable.  It didn't start out that way but because of a legal skirmish with Dash Poet, Linda Ellis, in 2013, we needed someone who had a backbone to support and defend ELI and not simply cave-in to a dumb complaint because someone's feelings gets hurt, we publicly insult a copyright extortionist, or report on publicly available information.

We have volunteer and knowledgeable contributors such as Greg Troy, Stinger, and a few others who donate their time to field questions and help be our eyes-and-ears when Oscar and I aren't available.

ELI Contributions are always appreciated and in 2016, I will be release a series of reports (priced from .99 to $9.99) published on Amazon Kindle (under the Defiantly Publishing banner) that will provide lots of valuable information to supplement the ELI Forums, the ELI Support Calls, and Oscar Michelen's Defense Letter Program.

I have long been an advocate of education especially legal education and I am taking it to the next level in 2016. Too many things have happened and I have seen too much to NOT follow through. And I hope ELI readers will support it. It will help ensure that the ELI team will continue to be strong and thrive. And we continue to fight for the underdogs.  The nice thing is that Amazon makes it easy to buy and publish.  It is easy for me to maintain and update. 

Hello ELItes!

I just wanted to thank everyone, especially Matthew and Oscar, who has put in the time to make this THE resource on extortion letters and the debate surrounding it. You're all good people. I'm going to send a donation to the site. It a very important resource and makes a HUGE difference. Don't ever shut down! I will keep the forum updated with whatever happens in my case.

654

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Pixsy takes aggressive stance

« on: December 23, 2015, 05:35:41 PM »

This might not help you now but your issues are common (single member LLC working from home) and is something I have a lot to say about and quite familiar with and know a lot of people in that situation.

I am going to put it "out there" that I will be releasing a Kindle report in 2016 that will go more in-depth on many of the issues you brought up (asset protection and lawsuit protection strategies).  Much of what I learned actually from the world of real estate investing and asset management circles but it can be applied here.

There are too many people who don't know where they stand and their options and very few lawyers are going to educate people on the matter for the simple fact that there is no money in it. And even if they do, most lawyers are too far removed from the streets to understand and relate to people in your position. I am a non-lawyer who knows a lot about "street law". Many lawyers deal on "pie in the sky" theoreticals. I take what I have learned and used over the years and give insights and opinions (not legal advice) of how to apply the information.

I will be releasing a series of Kindle reports will be priced anywhere from .99 to $9.99 and it is going to have "street law" information in a way that I have not seen written anywhere. It will be under the Defiantly Publishing banner.

The ELI Forums will continue to be the leading source of free information but for those who want a very focused discussion and do targeted learning, there will be a nominal charge to support ELI and the work I do.

Trust me, even at $9.99, it is bargain.  One nugget will more than pay for itself when you consider lawyers charge $300/hour and up.

Yes, this post was a bit of an ad but it also happens to be true. I am sick and tired of the little guy getting beaten up and being unfairly bullied legally and judicially for too many years.  I am going to do something about it and start educating people in a big way and Amazon will be helping me do it. I can't do it for free because this is real work.  But it doesn't have to be expensive to get some good quality practical information either.

655

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Pixsy takes aggressive stance

« on: December 22, 2015, 02:58:10 PM »

I am not giving legal advice here and I was trying to make my point short but you have not picked up what I said so I will be more direct. My non-lawyer opinion is that if you actively dissolve the LLC it might be problematic because of certain things you have to sign to. Go read what is involved. If you let the state dissolve it by letting the annual fees lapse, you did not sign to any conditions of dissolution.

It is entirely up to you whether the "hassle" is worth the headache. People want nice crispy answers but often, there isn't.  People's priorities, situations, and personalities are different.  People frequently ask me what I would do. Well, I typically do things many people are NOT willing to do and sometimes that is what makes all the difference.

Your branding has very little to do with corporate name. Most people don't realize you can create a brand and presence with little impact from what the actual corporate name is. Companies big and small do it all the time. I've done it many times. It is quite common.

Keep getting educated.  Many strategies to use but too long for me to get into here.

Epstein Drangel LLP is a name I have not heard of before. They might be new to the copyright extortion game.  I will have to take a peek at them sometime.

656

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Pixsy takes aggressive stance

« on: December 21, 2015, 10:42:51 PM »

Who is the law firm? It helps to know. Most won't pursue a lawsuit.  And even if they do file a lawsuit, most won't go the distance.

Regarding dissolving the LLC, it is extreme without knowing all your options. However, if you were to dissolved your LLC (assuming it is small and has minimal assets), the best way is close your checking account and to simply stop paying your annual fees and let the state dissolve it for you.

657

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Minden Pictures

« on: December 21, 2015, 08:19:16 PM »

The issue isn't about Minden Pictures.  It is about LCS (a division of Getty Images) who is handling it. That is what you need to get educated on. Plenty of posts on both LCS and Getty Images to refer to.

658

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: License Compliance Services Inc. Corporate Naming Hanky-Panky?

« on: December 21, 2015, 03:47:24 PM »

They may or may not have moved. They might have simply changed their mailing address, not their operational address. We really don't know nor is it really that important.  LCS = Getty Images in 95% of their operation and procedures from what I can tell.

But what I do know that Getty Images, Masterfile, and many others are avid readers of ELI. The problem with some of our public sharing of information is that they occasionally adjust and act upon the information we disseminate.  They might simply changed mailing addresses to fake out the uninformed.

We try to be open with our information but occasionally we have to hold back. The only way to find out certain pieces of information is through an ELI Support Call although I will plainly say that 90% of the information you need is available for free. The other 10% is trivia, personal, sensitive, or a need-to-know basis.

They have a bunch of lawyers on staff and on retainer but can't get the corporate naming/presence thing straight for LCS. Quite pathetic.

659

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Extortion Letter from LCS

« on: December 21, 2015, 03:38:01 PM »

The quick cheat to get educated is to treat LCS employees as if they were LCS employees and the LCS operation as if they were a Getty Images operation. The names may be different of the players but functionally identical. The exception is that LCS is making claims for other photographers and stock photo companies, not themselves.

Effectively, this makes LCS a bit more impotent and sterile than the main Getty Images operation. They are the slightly uglier stepchildren and inbred cousins of the overall operation. They likely trade information between the divisions and likely engage in a corporate incestuous operation. That is how closely related they are. They are likely boinking with each other (corporately).

I received a letter from LCS recently and would be very interested in hearing more about your experience with Getty as I know they are "closely related".

660

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Extortion Letter from ICS

« on: December 18, 2015, 02:01:44 AM »

ICS?  Do you mean LCS as in License Compliance Services?