Messages

661

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A.K. (Amanda) Taylor's Awesome Blog posts

« on: December 15, 2015, 12:53:21 PM »

No problems.  People stop into the ELI Forums whenever it is convenient for them which is as it should be.

Thank you, Matthew! This is still so cool of you! Hi again to all since it's been awhile since I've posted since I have been busy writing for my blog and working and writing/brainstorming for my books.

662

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A.K. (Amanda) Taylor's Awesome Blog posts

« on: December 15, 2015, 12:52:00 PM »

Yeah, Robert can be a real bastard that way. But of course I refer to him as "bastard" with only the utmost respect!  *wink*

You will likely be hearing from Roberts attorney concerning the failed attribution. 

663

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A.K. (Amanda) Taylor's Awesome Blog posts

« on: December 04, 2015, 03:54:21 PM »

Ooops, I forgot to give proper credit to Robert for finding Amanda's posts about ELI, Linda, etc. Gotta give credit where credit is due.

664

Getty Images Letter Forum / A.K. (Amanda) Taylor's Awesome Blog posts

« on: December 03, 2015, 08:23:52 PM »

I was told a couple of weeks ago about a few special blog posts (by Robert Krausankas) that caught his attention. They were written by A.K. Taylor who goes by "Amanda" on the ELI Forums. Amanda has a number of posts on the ELI Forums earlier this year. However, we never knew she was a blogger and author also.

I finally got acquainted with her and invited her into the ELI fold. When you read her blog posts, you will know why. She is kick-ass, a fighter, writes amazingly well, and seems to love all of us here at ELI especially Oscar! I think she has the "right stuff" for ELI. She even gave one of Robert's favorite awards (the asshat award) to someone!

I am posting her links in the order she wrote them. Be forewarned, she covers a lot of ground and has become quite outspoken and passionate in her dislike of copyright extortionists.  Just the type of person we love to have onboard with ELI.

http://www.backwoodsauthor.com/2015/07/20/the-dark-side-of-the-dash-the-worst-author-epic-fail-and-bad-behavior-i-have-ever-seen/

http://www.backwoodsauthor.com/2015/08/03/copyright-trolls-fantastical-creatures-or-nightmarish-reality/

http://www.backwoodsauthor.com/2015/08/03/intro-to-copyright-extortion-schoolyard-shenanigans-robbers-and-copyright-trolls/

http://www.backwoodsauthor.com/2015/11/18/copyright-troll-1-john-deboer-copyright-nazi/

She is enthusiastic in recommending and referring others to ELI. Clearly, I have a strong bias towards people willing to stand up and speak out on our behalf. For that, we are grateful.

665

Getty Images Letter Forum / Copyright Extortion Crybabies

« on: December 03, 2015, 05:02:00 AM »

I started this thread to shine a light on the dumb, pathetic things that copyright extortionists do behind-the-scenes.  They act so tough and so smart with their boilerplate letters and canned responses by taking advantage of legally-naive people by trying to extract extortionate amounts of money (hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars) over images not worth more than $50.

They like to play psychological games and invoke fear and paranoia by their carefully-worded letters. They try to invoke the lawsuit system as a matter of course but the reality is that it is rarely executed except for the most egregious/unusual situations.

I have taken some heat and grief over the years by bluntly calling out both the people and the tactics being used. I use NSFW language and dish out a bunch of insults and name-calling.  Why not?  Why be polite or respectful to people who are unreasonable, take advantage of your legal naivete, and take your money? I am a big believer in fighting fire with your own fire and blast back very hard.

Over the years, I have made many predictions, insights, and educated guesses that ultimately turned out to be true. Part of the reason I have been able to do that is that I don't trust what is being told to me. I am a skeptic. I verify, I do my homework, research, and due diligence. I look beyond the smoke and mirrors.

I also have a good understanding of how corporate drones and their managers work. There is a reason why Dilbert is so popular. A lot of these employees at Getty Images, Mastefile, their lawyers, etc. follow a predictable pattern because they ultimately draw and dependent on a paycheck. Most are not self-made people. With no employer, they would have zero power and zero income. I know this and they know it. We keep a list of names on these folks especially the long-timers.

They need to always "look good" and look tough. I talk shit because I work for myself and I don't have to impress any employer. I work for the masses and my mission is clear. I help people who unintentionally infringe defend and fight back against extortionate letter demands.

This thread will contain true stories of asswipery that most people don't know about. I am not going to do it in one shot because there are too many stories. But I will occasionally update this thread with true stories to show what schmucks many of the people in the copyright extortion business truly are. You can be informed and entertained that these people are not what they try to convince others they are.

My first story is about an ex-internal Getty Images lawyer that left the company. Apparently, he found his name being listed on ELI a few years ago and practically begged me via email to remove his name. He wanted to make sure I had "accurate information" that he was no longer associated with Getty Images. So what does that tell you? Crybaby ex-lawyer of Getty Images.

My second story involves the 30-something ex-Getty Images female employee (C.S.) who tried to bullshit me in 2008 and begged one of her ex-managers a few years ago to ask Oscar to ask ME to remove her name from ELI because she had left the company.  I gave Oscar an unhappy reaction to that request because she was the one that pissed me off so much that I came up with the idea to launch ELI. In many ways, she was one reason why I launched ELI to punch back against her. I may never know why she stopped coming at me but I never heard from her or Getty Images again after my 2nd response letter to her. Maybe because it had something to do with my launching ELI and calling her out on her personal info that she herself published on the Internet? She was okay trying to bullshit me until I called bullshit on her. Amazing how she disappeared after that.

She was a chicken-shit for not asking me directly and so was her ex-manager (Getty Images employee) for crying to Oscar and not coming to me. Maybe because they knew I would give them a very unhappy response for trying to extort me and me turning the tables turned on them for a fucking change.

As a side note, when I published my response letters back in 2008 for others to see, I never imagined people would actually copy and clone my letter so closely because I thought the letter was unique to my situation. Apparently, I have been told more than once that the Getty Images license compliance folks dislike seeing similar copies of my letters used and sent to them repeatedly.  Personally, I think that is funny. My case is long over and yet they continue to get variations of my letter year after year by various people.  Gotta love it.  Today, Getty Images is in so much financial trouble. They might get lucky and save themselves. But if they don't, it is going to get very educational for many people.

666

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile v. Law Firm of Jerry Joseph Settled

« on: December 03, 2015, 04:08:58 AM »

I want to remind Masterfile letter recipients that Masterfile is conveniently milking the so-called "Offer of Judgment by Jerry Joseph" for all it is worth.  Every time I see a Masterfile case, low-level, non-lawyer clerk, Michael Hilsheimer, is pushing the "Offer of Judgment by Jerry Joseph" and "Notice of Acceptance by Jerry Joseph" documents.

Masterfile includes these attachments to convince naive letter-recipients that it was a court win against a spectacular infringing lawyer by Mastefile.  It wasn't.  Jerry Joseph is a low-funded, sole practitioner lawyer who cried UNCLE and offered it up himself because he made not-so-smart decisions from the outset!  This was NOT a court-ruled or court-decided judgment!

This so-called "judgment" was OFFERED by sole practitioner lawyer, Jerry Joseph, after he responded to the situation with the intelligence of a 7th-grader. Sole-practitioner lawyers are typically not well-capitalized and they often lack common business sense. They might know more law than most of us but it doesn't mean they are any smarter in practical terms. After all, I don't see any non-lawyers offering up their names for Masterfile to use against others.  Most simply sign a non-disclosure agreement and pay their money quietly. 

Frankly, sole practitioner lawyers often don't have the stomach or finances for a protracted legal defense. And most lawyers don't have the luxury of ignoring or walking away from court judgments as non-lawyer types often do because it really looks bad on their record. And yet, here we have an allegedly smart lawyer who ran his case into the ditch and allows Masterfile to continue using his name to intimidate others into paying.

For me personally as a non-lawyer and aggressive self-defender, I have no qualms about not paying or avoiding wrongful or unreasonable judgments if it becomes necessary. In the U.S., people are allowed to avoid wrongful or unreasonable judgments (assuming you know the civil risks of doing so). But you don't go to jail for not cooperating with bad judgments. I know some of my enemies reading this are going to start jumping up and down on this but I am stating my OPINION of what I MIGHT DO if faced with the situation.  People can do whatever they want with my non-lawyer (but well-informed) opinions.

Masterfile does file lawsuits on occasion but only with the most egregious situations. They are not filing lawsuits like mad demons in years past.  In 2015, they filed a total of 3 lawsuits and they were hand-picked for effect. They were also hand-picked for the likelihood they wouldn't lose their financial ass by doing so.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that after several dozens of stampede lawsuits prior to 2012 then suddenly dropping to ZERO lawsuits in 2013, 4 lawsuits in 2014, and 3 lawsuits in 2015, that Masterfile learned that filing extortionate lawsuits against a bunch of unwilling & uncooperative defendants became an extremely unprofitable venture. Masterfile didn't stop filing lawsuits because they suddenly got struck with a guilty conscience. They likely stopped filing lawsuits because they were likely losing their financial asses in attorney fees owed to their lawyers.  The only people who made out like bandits were Masterfile's lawyers "winning" their cases but not collecting enough real cash to justify the time, energy, and costs of the lawsuits.

Masterfile letter recipients should not be naive and ignorant about their sneaky, underhanded tactics. They only work for the legally-naive.

I felt the need to update this thread with the latest comments because I have seen one Michael Hilsheimer letter too many. This clerk is such a servant to Masterfile that he has thrown his career out the window.  He will never be able to leave the copyright extortion business because people who learn about what he does would never want to employ him again. That is his fate. Masterfile, like Getty Images, chew up their employees and throw them out.

Speaking about employees, as a side note totally unrelated to Masterfile, one Getty Images lawyer practically begged me to remove his name from ELI after he left employment a couple years ago. What a schmuck. He wasn't so proud to be with Getty Images after all if he felt the need to ask me to remove his name.

And the Getty Images employee (a lowly female clerk) who tried to bullshit me in 2008 begged one of her managers a few years ago to ask Oscar to ask me to remove her name from ELI. That female employee (C.S.) and the Getty Images manager were too much of a chicken-shit to ask me directly. She came to realize that I was correct about her looking bad being in the copyright extortion business or she would never have asked to have her name removed from ELI. Now that she has left, I don't think she will ever return to the world of copyright extortions.  Lowly clerks who do their "jobs" find out after they leave that they look like shit to the rest of the world of being in the copyright extortion business. Michael Hilsheimer will likely become the next C.S. at some point.

The upside of all this is that the female Getty Images employee (C.S.) can take credit that she was the one that helped give birth to ELI.

667

Getty Images Letter Forum / Stern & Schurin LLP Law Firm is based in Mineola, NY

« on: December 02, 2015, 04:29:32 AM »

Just to let everyone know, Stern & Schurin LLP Law Firm, seems to making semi-regular appearances in the escalation letter business.  They appear to be picking up some of the similar type of work for License Compliance Services (LCS) [a division or spin-off of Getty Images license compliance services] that Timmy McCormack's firm did for Getty Images. AS such, they are officially on ELI's radar and people should report and monitor what they do.

Stern & Schurin's working relationship to LCS's appears to be similar to McCormack's relationship to Getty Images. It appears to me that Stern & Schurin are becoming "steadies" with LCS.

What makes the rise of Stern & Schuring LLP particularly interesting is that (unlike McCormack who is in the opposite corner of the U.S. in Seattle) they are located at:

410 E. Jericho Turnpike
Mineola, New York 11501

https://www.google.com/maps/place/410+E+Jericho+Turnpike,+Mineola,+NY+11501/@40.7562649,-73.6219449,3a,90y,324.33h,84.77t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slggoPJIqjHTu2XK6Fm0B5w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DlggoPJIqjHTu2XK6Fm0B5w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.TACTILE.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D392%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D300.94989%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c287913d597291:0x57bb6b125de8c9d4!6m1!1e1

Mineola, NY is the very same city where our own Oscar Michelen's law office is located! In fact, according to Google Maps, they are only 2.3 miles away from each other.

I asked Oscar a couple months back if he knew the law firm or met any of the lawyers from Stern & Schuring. He said he had heard of them but never met them. If Stern & Schuring continues their troll work, they will eventually face-off against Oscar right in Mineola!

668

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Why wouldn't a Troll request domain ownership data from DBP?

« on: December 02, 2015, 03:56:50 AM »

Given that I know your situation, I have more than a "guess".  I have a good idea of how these folks work.  They go after the easiest, most attractive and lucrative targets regardless of fault. The hope is that they will simply cave in and pay due to the sheer of defending it.

Unless you have some special communication with DBP, why would you assume that because an event something hasn't happened that it is considered "purposeful avoidance"? If it hasn't happened, it is because they are targeting someone else or have their attentions focused elsewhere. Your assumption that they are "purposefully avoiding" getting information is flawed. It means they are not currently focused on you!

In any case, how would you know they have NOT asked for information from Domains By Proxy and simply sitting on it? Did DBP tell you that no one has asked for your information? If so, why would you question the good news?

Some people are wrought with fear and paranoia. It is almost like they are disappointed when things don't happen when they "should". Most people think that "their case" is so special that the trolls are working 8 hours/day on the case when the reality is that troll efforts are spread across numerous (perhaps hundreds) of alleged infringers at any given time.

As far as I am concerned, this is not a strange situation.  It happens all the time. Trolls get it wrong, they target easy prey, or they have multiple cases going on at one time. I have seen it happen repeatedly over the years. No news is good news and you are overthinking this.  There is no conspiracy over this.

You can't understand it because you are being paranoid and you think someone is focused on you. 3 years is the magic number. Don't overthink this and make it complicated. It isn't.

If you can't stand the uncertainty, you can always reach out to the trolls and self-identify so that the uncertainty goes away although I think that would be stupid.

669

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Does "innocent infringement" fall apart with copyright registration?

« on: November 18, 2015, 01:18:37 PM »

If an image is registered properly, then statutory damages generally applies but that assumes it will be litigated which is costly and risky proposition for the plaintiff.  The minimum amount for statutory damages ranges from $750 plus any legal fees.

Judges have LOTS of discretion. I have seen many cases where the party might have won on paper but they ultimately lost because the judge didn't give the plaintiffs everything they wanted.

Whether you infringed "innocently" or "willfully" does matter as a practical matter. It matters in determining the dollar amount.  There are lawyers that want to use the legal definition of what "innocence" and "willful" are. But as a practical matter, judges are human beings and many are quite familiar with copyright extortion schemes. The plaintiff might win, but the judge also has the discretion to give (and do) the absolute minimum.

The trouble with too many victims is they are trying to "outlawyer" and "convince" the other side. You will never stun or argue them into silence or submission.  They will always have a counter-argument.  Some are just plain bimbos.  I won't name any names but there are bouncy bimbos in the business.

Most victims will never succeed in trying to outargue them. At some point, victims need to make a very firm, strong stand along with a strong message that there will be an unpleasant and unhappy experience coming after you. (I have a knack for boomeranging on attackers. I can never promise I will win every fight but I can promise to make the experience very unpleasant to unreasonable or irrational people. There are many LEGAL strategies and tactics which are generally beyond the scope of this forum. But just know that they do exist.)

Alternatively, you can hire someone to make a stand for you like Oscar.

I've read that an "innocent infringement" defense isn't possible if the image happens to be properly copyrighted.  Is that just a hard and fast rule? Seems like a very easy way for the troll to guarantee a minimum of $750 income off their trolling system no matter what. No?

Also it seems kind of disingenuous, as an innocent infringer obviously wouldn't have had any idea the image was copyrighted one way or another!

670

Getty Images Letter Forum / Because Getty Images DOESN'T want their email shared, I will share it

« on: November 17, 2015, 03:47:33 PM »

This appears to be one of their new standardized (but redacted) email letters.  They have the stupid "confidential" disclaimer that only the ignorant would ever pay attention to. And because Getty doesn't want it shown, I will therefore show it as I legally obtained this email.

Of course, I have to sprinkle in some of my colorful comments inline.

================
From: [email protected]
To: XXXX; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Unauthorized Use Notification #XXXXX - Getty Images Copyright Notification
Date: XXXX +0000

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
 
RE: XXXXXXX   

Dear XXXXXX,

In response, the cost our customers pay to lease this image for XXX months under our licensing terms for digital media, web corporate or promotional site, and small resolution and repeated use, (image found on these web pages http://www.XXXX.com, for approximately XXX months is $XXX.00, as shown below:

The settlement offer of $XXXX.00 is an average cost to license Rights-managed imagery for this specific use.

If you feel the settlement offer is disproportionate from your usage, I would encourage you to disclose usage of the imagery in question, including length of use, other websites, and mediums that may have not yet been identified or made known to my team.

[Who, us? Would we really ever think Getty was ever "disproportionate"? Yes, I will absolutely help you in your case and also give you my credit report, balance sheet, my property holdings, my tax returns, and the names and ages of my family members just to make sure you have everything you need!]
 
The requested information, such as proof, registrations and representation would be furnished only when compelled by the court through the course of discovery.  To provide this information beforehand would take additional time as well as additional costs.  Our settlements are set up to quickly close unauthorized use cases.

[Yes, but of course, you are so trustworthy. We all know that Getty Images has a stellar reputation for dotting their I's and crossing their T's when it comes to copyright registrations. God forbid, a multi-million dollar business would want to expend any costs to show or explain their case. It used to be that you sent real letters but for OUR benefit, you will bypass the U.S. Postal Service and/or FedEx and just let you email it to us.  After all, we know you are in the service business!  We will also take your word for it because you run such a stellar operation because we all know you are doing it for OUR OWN GOOD by accepting hundreds of dollars for images with a market value of $50.]
 
If cases were to go to legal proceedings, our represented photographers would have registrations prior to filing. Getty Images is unable to provide further evidence at this time.  If you have further questions, you may wish to discuss this matter with an attorney that specializes in copyright law.

[Yes, of course, we know that every Getty photographer is well-heeled enough to have diligently paid and filed a legitimate copyright registration on every photo they have ever taken and sold. After all, photographers are known for their attention to detail and they have hundreds of dollars to pay for copyright registrations of images worth $50.]

The terms of this settlement offer shall be kept confidential, except as may be required by law.  Getty Images expressly reserves all rights and remedies available under copyright law. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

[Yes, of course, they would be confidential. It is such a favor you are doing for the public by keeping settlement amounts very quiet, low-key, and to forbid them from every discussing what they paid off.  It is so wonderful to cooperate, pay hundreds of dollars, and be muzzled.  Can I please be part of this special Getty program?]

Best regards,

D. Bieker
Copyright Compliance Specialist
Getty Images
[email protected]

Getty Images Headquarters
605 5th Avenue S., Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104 USA

Direct 206.925.7622
Toll Free: 800.972.4170  ext 7622
Fax: 206.925.5001

http://www.copyrightlaws.com/us/5-things-you-may-not-know-about-u-s-copyright-law/  is an excellent source of basic information about copyright laws.

For more information about the Getty Images License Compliance Program, please visit http://company.gettyimages.com/license-compliance  and http://stories.gettyimages.com/category/visual-insights/copyright/
  _____

©2015 Getty Images, Inc.

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
This message may contain privileged or confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail or any attachments hereto. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system without copying or disclosing the contents. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. Getty Images, 605 5th Avenue S., Suite 400, Seattle, WA. 98104, USA, www.gettyimages.com. PLEASE NOTE that all incoming e-mails will be automatically scanned by us and by an external service provider to eliminate unsolicited promotional e-mails ("spam"). This could result in deletion of a legitimate e-mail before it is read by its intended recipient at our firm. Please tell us if you have concerns about this automatic filtering.   

671

Getty Images Letter Forum / This ABA Article Confirms that Many Lawyers Live in Fear!

« on: October 27, 2015, 07:21:27 AM »

The ABA article confirms what I have long known: many lawyers live in fear. Copyright extortion lawyers are largely a cowardly lot and vulnerable to many things... if one is informed and insightful.

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/how_lawyers_can_turn_fear_into_an_ally

Lawyers are much more fearful than most people know.  I have seen this many times over the years. I am a student of human behavior and I notice small things that go unnoticed. I watch and study people of all socio-economic and professional status. I learn what makes them tick. I have a highly-tuned intuitive bullshit detector and I know how to research and corroborate information people try to sell me. I never take anything at face value without running it through my internal bullshit detector.

So many lawyers say "the law is clear". If the law is always so fucking "clear", why are our courts always clogged with lawyers on BOTH sides fighting it out in front of judges? Always remember this! Small claims court, traffic court, magistrate/municipal courts, superior courts, appellate courts, and even the U.S. Supreme Court are always backlogged. There is no such thing as a slow day in the court business.

Copyright extortion lawyers, in particular, are not very successful which is why they rely on 30%-40% commissions from each alleged "claim". That is also why each alleged "claim" is so high, they want to make sure their take is a big "score" AT YOUR EXPENSE! And if they "score" on you because of your ignorance, it is like you being raped in your rear orifice while you sleep. So, don't get sleep-raped by copyright extortionists. That is why ELI shouts to everyone, GET EDUCATED, GET A SPINE, DON'T BE LOW-HANGING FRUIT!

If copyright extortion lawyers were so smart and successful, they would not have to work for extortion commissions. That is why ELI often beat down most of the extortion lawyers that try to go up against ELI or victims defended by ELI. We call them out on their ugly tactics because we are not fooled so easily. The list of lawyers the ELI Defense Team has gone up against has been numerous, I have lost count.

ELI has so many tactics and strategies to beat them back (or at least prevent them from ripping people off indiscriminately). They have tried to attack ELI many times using very sneaky ways that the public doesn't know about. This isn't a conspiracy theory. This can be backed up by documented emails and letters we have seen and on record. I have witnesses. I dare any ELI enemies to challenge us on this because I am looking for a good excuse to do a massive expose' dump on so many and so much.

Contrary to what some copyright extortionists have claimed, Oscar Michelen doesn't need the business. ELI has always been a goodwill project for him. I have threatened to walk away from ELI over the years but Oscar is a legal warrior and I (along with the ELI Defense Team) continue to be proud to publicly stand with him on this. I teach people to how to get smart, get a spine, and how NOT to be low-hanging fruit. After over 7 years, ELI still refuses to let copyright extortionists win.

You might be here because of a copyright extortion letter. But you will learn many lessons, tactics, and strategies that you can take and use in other situations. Get smart, get educated, get empowered, get a spine, and get a voice.  Stick with and make friends with people who aren't spineless. Stay away from cowardly ignorant people because they bring nothing to the table and only teach people to be victims in life.

Don't make it easy for people to victimize you. Never be low-hanging fruit especially to dumb lawyers who try and dazzle you with their so-called "brilliance".

672

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Toptal Engineering Tries To Spam & Ride My Getty Images Extortion Letter Story

« on: October 23, 2015, 03:35:50 AM »

Gmail does a good job screening out most of the garbage that comes my way. However, I somehow get on a number of lists by vendors shilling out their Indian web development services. The Indian stuff are very annoying because they tend to get through the Gmail spam filters. The Nigerian stuff are so bad because of the horrible spelling and sentences, they get screened out easily by Gmail.

I get Chinese printing companies constantly pitching me book printing services also. Their English pitches are horrible.

I also get many offers from people who want to give me "great articles" to post on my various blogs.  I generally ignore them or tell them to take a hike.  I think it is sad that there is a niche industry begging bloggers like me (who know how to write legitimate content & get quality traffic without resorting to sleazy tactics) to post their crap. What is especially insulting is that the pay is crap.

Her spam email seemed to provide "legitimate" contact information and I figured I would blast her and help tarnish their Google reputation along the way. There is no penalty or consequence for just deleting the email so I decided to take a few minutes and whack them for a change and give them a "consequence".

What fool does she think she will find to promote their "web design interviewing" scummy paper? I can't imagine anyone who has any smarts would ever agree to it.

673

Getty Images Letter Forum / Toptal Engineering Tries To Spam & Ride My Getty Images Extortion Letter Story

« on: October 20, 2015, 03:25:23 PM »

I just got one of the stupidest emails of all time from a moronic person from a moronic business trying to tie into one of my 2008 Getty Images extortion letter posts.

Dear Matthew,

My name is Irina and I'm the Developer Evangelist at Toptal. Our Toptal Engineering Blog has published a great post called "The Vital Guide to Web Design Interviewing," and I think it would be of interest to your readers, especially since your community has already published an article related to web design.

Is this something you would be interested in sharing on your site? In addition, I would be open to discussing other ways in which we could collaborate. Would you be up for a Skype chat sometime?

Kind Regards,
Irina

Irina Papuc | Toptal | 815-307-3957 (mobile)
irina.p@toptal .com | Skype: @irinel1957 | Schedule an appointment
Toptal - Hire the Top 3% of Freelance Developers
If you'd like me to stop sending you emails, please click here

"Toptal Engineering" wants me to link a post I wrote 7 years ago regarding my receiving a Getty Images extortion letter: http://matthewchan.com/2008/06/17/i-received-a-getty-images-settlement-demand-letter/ to their "great post" "The Vital Guide to Web Design Interviewing". Sure, because my 2008 Getty Images extortion letter post is ABSOLUTELY related to their "website design interviewing".... NOT.

So, I am going to give them free advertising and hopefully Google will index this post with their business names. If anyone wants to contact these foreign, ripoff artists and have them work on your website, you now have the contact info.

I gave them my "standard" reply for spamming scammers.

You are a fucking idiot spammer who has no clue that that the link you provided from my website has absolutely NO CONNECTION to your topic whatsoever.  You obviously have no fucking clue what you are even submitting or what my article even says!

Take me off your spam list.

674

Getty Images Letter Forum / Techdirt: Getty Images, License Compliance Services, Trunk Archive Extortion

« on: October 16, 2015, 02:38:37 AM »

Our friends at Techdirt has written about Getty Images' License Compliance Services latest extortion antics on behalf of Trunk Archive. The target is 2600 Magazine who have chosen to fight back and report the matter to Techdirt. More power to them for exposing the extortion letter they received!

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150908/18123432199/getty-images-tries-to-copyright-troll-2600-magazine-over-content-it-has-no-copyright-over.shtml

Special thanks to ELI Team Member, Robert K. (also of copyright-trolls.com) for emailing this to my attention.

Please note the final paragraph in the Techdirt article.

So that's twice this week that we're seeing Getty Images act not just like a typical copyright troll, but one that is so drunk with shakedown power that it's not even bothering to understand just what the fuck it's doing. But, of course, the company can get away with this kind of stuff because (1) there's no punishment for abusing the law in this manner and (2) many sites will probably just pay up rather than deal with the legal threats. It's legalized extortion, and Getty is profiting from it at the expense of actual creators. In yesterday's post, Getty gave some bullshit answer about protecting the rights of the artist. What's its excuse going to be this time?

This is something ELI has been preaching since 2008! It is always glad to see someone else independently corroborate what we have long known and reported.

675

Getty Images Letter Forum / StockPhotoSecrets.com 99Club

« on: October 02, 2015, 03:52:02 PM »

This stock photo website was referred to me by a client. She intrigued me when she stated the terms of membership was $99/year for 200 images.

http://shop.stockphotosecrets.com/index.cfm?id=99club

Because she is a Getty letter victim, she is understandably going out of her way to NOT support any Getty-related businesses, if possible.

I have taken a peek and tried to do some light vetting of the website. However, I really can't tell if this website is "legitimate" or not. I question the legitimacy because $99/year is almost too cheap even if it is limited to 200 photos.  If it was limited to 100 photos, it would still be cheap to me.

So, go check it out and give feedback. I am not endorsing this website. I am simply passing along a lead.  I know very little about this website and how it works. She isn't using the website and can't vouch on who actually owns this website.

She seems to like http://fotolia.com though.