721
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: 20 questions interview
« on: October 07, 2013, 10:03:04 AM »Ditto what Greg said.
Then I think you both need to submit a question!
| Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program | |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Then I think you both need to submit a question!
722
Getty Images Letter Forum / 20 questions interview
« on: October 05, 2013, 08:30:27 AM »
I will be conducting a 20 question/answer interview with Matthew Chan to be hosted on copyright-trolls.com. I would like to include the ELI community to take part in this.. If you have a burning question for Matthew simply email your questions ( do not post them here ) to admin(at)copyright-trolls.com
Please keep in mind there are some questions that will be off limits, given the ongoing appeal..Questions do not need to be copyright or ELI related, they can be wide ranging. If you would like to stay anonymous, please make this be known in your email and I will honor your request.
If this works out , there may be other question/answer interviews with others.
Please keep in mind there are some questions that will be off limits, given the ongoing appeal..Questions do not need to be copyright or ELI related, they can be wide ranging. If you would like to stay anonymous, please make this be known in your email and I will honor your request.
If this works out , there may be other question/answer interviews with others.
723
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Hiring my own photographer and getting the copywrite
« on: October 05, 2013, 07:29:24 AM »
I was just having this same conversation the other day with Matthew. Most photographers are simply not going to releases the copyright, but rather will write in a clause, that gives you usage rights. Some will release the copyright, but you can plan on paying much, much more. As Jerry stated you could hire someone who would be an actual employee of your company, and skirt this issue, as it would be a work for hire by default. The other thing you need to consider is that copyright exists at the moment of creation, so even if the contract states that the photog is giving you copyright, I'm fairly certain, you would also need to have a legal copyright release, in addition to the contract..
I know and realize a lot of folks don't understand the thinking of why photogs seem so protective, a couple simple examples would be something like this.. ( keep in mind as a photog myself, this doesn't mean I would subscribe to this, it would greatly depend on the situation )
Lets say I am hired to shoot pictures of a no-name garage band and I release the copyright to them...5 yrs later, they are huge, my image which they now own lands on the cover of Rolling Stone, which in turn allows the band to sell 5 million cd's, and the cd cover is also one of the images I shot..The band just made a boatload of cash from record sales, and Rolling Stone also paid a hefty price to feature that cover on millions of magazines. Since I turned over the copyright, I make zero, not do I even get a credit for the photo, which doesn't help my business.. yes a an extreme sample, but the thinking behind it is the same..
Another example would be you hire me to photo your wedding, and I release the copyright, after spending hours cropping , editing the images.. You know have these images, which you send out to 50 family members, who proceed into walmart to get discount prints. Normally those 50 family memebers would need to order prints through me the photog...so I just lost those sales.. secondly they go to Walmart to get discount prints, and now all of the skin tones have a greenish hue to them..so they get the print, proudly hang it in theor home..a visitor comes by, looks at the cheesy cheap greeninsh print, and is told, yeah Bob the photog shot those, and they say, "we won't be hiring this guy, your family looks like a bunch of greenish trolls...more lost revenue, because the photog released copyright...
and another exampe using a Getty stock image which actually happened to a client of mine. Sperry shoes licensed an image from Getty images for use on their website and print ads. Sperry in turn told my client he could use the image on his website and even emailed him the image..Eventually my client gets the nasty-gram...you see it's all about keeping control of the images..my client used the image to promote the products it sells, and naturally Sperry is happy with this, but Getty is not, as my client did not purchase the image, and Sperry doesn't get to spread the image around to retailers as they don't own the image, the retailers are making money from using the image, but the photog doesn't stand to make anything, unless Getty collects and passes it along.
It's kinda weird for me to sometimes be on both sides of the fence, with this whole copyright thing, but I think I get an advantage in learning and understanding the mindset a little better from both sides...and yeah most ( not all, but most ) photogs can be dick heads, plain and simple in terms of how they enforce their copyright. The ones that will succeed are the ones that will change and adapt to the indusrty.
I know and realize a lot of folks don't understand the thinking of why photogs seem so protective, a couple simple examples would be something like this.. ( keep in mind as a photog myself, this doesn't mean I would subscribe to this, it would greatly depend on the situation )
Lets say I am hired to shoot pictures of a no-name garage band and I release the copyright to them...5 yrs later, they are huge, my image which they now own lands on the cover of Rolling Stone, which in turn allows the band to sell 5 million cd's, and the cd cover is also one of the images I shot..The band just made a boatload of cash from record sales, and Rolling Stone also paid a hefty price to feature that cover on millions of magazines. Since I turned over the copyright, I make zero, not do I even get a credit for the photo, which doesn't help my business.. yes a an extreme sample, but the thinking behind it is the same..
Another example would be you hire me to photo your wedding, and I release the copyright, after spending hours cropping , editing the images.. You know have these images, which you send out to 50 family members, who proceed into walmart to get discount prints. Normally those 50 family memebers would need to order prints through me the photog...so I just lost those sales.. secondly they go to Walmart to get discount prints, and now all of the skin tones have a greenish hue to them..so they get the print, proudly hang it in theor home..a visitor comes by, looks at the cheesy cheap greeninsh print, and is told, yeah Bob the photog shot those, and they say, "we won't be hiring this guy, your family looks like a bunch of greenish trolls...more lost revenue, because the photog released copyright...
and another exampe using a Getty stock image which actually happened to a client of mine. Sperry shoes licensed an image from Getty images for use on their website and print ads. Sperry in turn told my client he could use the image on his website and even emailed him the image..Eventually my client gets the nasty-gram...you see it's all about keeping control of the images..my client used the image to promote the products it sells, and naturally Sperry is happy with this, but Getty is not, as my client did not purchase the image, and Sperry doesn't get to spread the image around to retailers as they don't own the image, the retailers are making money from using the image, but the photog doesn't stand to make anything, unless Getty collects and passes it along.
It's kinda weird for me to sometimes be on both sides of the fence, with this whole copyright thing, but I think I get an advantage in learning and understanding the mindset a little better from both sides...and yeah most ( not all, but most ) photogs can be dick heads, plain and simple in terms of how they enforce their copyright. The ones that will succeed are the ones that will change and adapt to the indusrty.
724
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter: Is this a Scam?
« on: October 02, 2013, 09:06:08 PM »You also need to step back and understand that when they say,QuoteShould we release this matter back to Masterfile, I assure you, they will no longer be willing to settle for an amount anywhere close to what they are prepared to accept at this time, it sounds very threatening and scary to you.
What it really means is, "If you won't pay us, we are powerless to make you pay us, and we are going to give this back to Masterfile as uncollectable." It doesn't mean that Masterfile is going to do anything. At best, they might try to give it to another bill collector, but the odds of their filing suit over an amount this small . . . you should be able to figure it out.
While I mostly agree with this, one other thing that should be considered, is that history tells us MF does file suit more often, and they also seem to have better registrations in place.. Truth is , if the OP doesn't have the stomach or will to continue with the back and forth, it might be best to simply hire Oscar and let him handle it.
725
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter: Is this a Scam?
« on: October 02, 2013, 08:49:14 AM »
This really is not rocket science, we've already told you how to handle NCS, multiple times. They have no say, this is a claim, not a debt, no one has supplied you proof of who owns what..They will continue to grill you until you either act or cave in. Furthermore it's an email, of which they have no idea if you're even getting them, simply report them and be done with them..then get prepared for MF to continue to hassle you or hire Oscar, or just pay them the full amount.
726
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Just Received second letter
« on: September 30, 2013, 11:20:24 AM »
read a bunch more..
727
Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Patent trolls have a new enemy: Martha Stewart
« on: September 28, 2013, 04:05:01 PM »Anyone suing a person with Martha Stewart's money and personality either has balls the size of watermelons or a brain the size of a frozen pea. I suspect the latter to be closest to the truth.
Agreed, but I also think the greedy bastards..and biatches don't pay attention to whom the letters are sent, just the number of letters sent, as the odds are in their favor of most just paying, but like we've seen with Getty every once in a while one decides to fight back, usually with good results..
I wonder if a Getty recipient decided to file suit after getting a letter, how fast Getty would rather settle, instead of answering hard questions and being fully exposed..One day that letter recipient will appear, just a matter of time.
728
Legal Controversies Forum / Patent trolls have a new enemy: Martha Stewart
« on: September 28, 2013, 01:19:17 PM »
Patent troll Lodsys demands $5,000 from Martha Stewart. That was a bad idea
Patent trolling has become so widespread that no business is safe. A couple of months ago I noted that Whataburger, Kroger and J. Crew had joined the anti-troll fight. Now one patent troll has attracted an even more formidable foe: Martha Stewart.
GigaOm reports that Stewart's firm, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, has filed a lawsuit against LodSys, one of the nation's most prolific patent trolls.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/26/patent-trolls-have-a-new-enemy-martha-stewart/
http://gigaom.com/2013/09/25/patent-troll-lodsys-demands-5000-from-martha-stewart-that-was-a-bad-idea/
Patent trolling has become so widespread that no business is safe. A couple of months ago I noted that Whataburger, Kroger and J. Crew had joined the anti-troll fight. Now one patent troll has attracted an even more formidable foe: Martha Stewart.
GigaOm reports that Stewart's firm, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, has filed a lawsuit against LodSys, one of the nation's most prolific patent trolls.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/26/patent-trolls-have-a-new-enemy-martha-stewart/
http://gigaom.com/2013/09/25/patent-troll-lodsys-demands-5000-from-martha-stewart-that-was-a-bad-idea/
729
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Social Media Contractor Who's Client Get's Letter From Getty's
« on: September 28, 2013, 07:40:25 AM »
yeah that attorneys pretty much sucked.... as for Google "saying it was free"...I've never seen this, in fact, google states on ALL image searches that "Images may be subject to copyright." This would not look good for you if Getty decided to pursue this.... Getty will quickly tire of dealing with you, and will probably simply go back to the client.. hiring Oscar on behalf of your client is probably the best option.
730
Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Vincent K Tylor has a nice payday
« on: September 26, 2013, 08:18:56 PM »Are you certain that email wasn't made by a plant? Publicize the "$12,000" payment story through a reputable source. A story designed to scare people into making a quicker smaller "affordable" settlement.
Yes I'm certain, as I know the persons name who sent it, their domain name, and IP address, and the whois all checked out..I did my homework first..
731
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I emailed letter on Jun 6th but have not received any answer yet
« on: September 25, 2013, 04:06:11 PM »Can someone confirm that these people who have not received help, nor contact, from the attorney are now being helped?
The reason I am asking is because I am considering using Oscar also, but won't do so if there simply is no help to be had, if he is too busy, etc. etc.
Can someone provide an update on this thread?
Being as Oscar has been bogged down lately, and none of us work in his office, and we don't know when he'll pop in, you might want to simply contact his office directly.
732
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Non-Profit Just Received Our First Getty Demand Letter
« on: September 25, 2013, 12:38:38 PM »
Being a non-profit does not come into play, and your statement "they waited 9 yrs" doesn't hold up either, it just took them that long to find the images. With that said, Getty would need to prove they had control off these images 9 yrs ago, and that the images in questions were NEVER offered elsewhere for sale or for free way back when. They have a very weak case in my opinion. Just because they MAY now have an agreement with the artist doesn't mean they always did. Either way you will need to decide which is best for you , on how you proceed..keep reading and learning before making a decision.
733
Legal Controversies Forum / LinkedIn Sued for Hacking Users and Spamming Contacts
« on: September 23, 2013, 06:57:01 AM »
Might be interesting to see how this pans out..
Four LinkedIn members filed a stunning complaint in federal court last week, accusing the professional social networking giant of hacking members’ email accounts in an effort to increase membership and revenues. The plaintiffs, seeking class action status, claimed that LinkedIn will surreptitiously harvest email addresses using “open” connections to email accounts such as Yahoo! Mail, Microsoft Mail, Google Gmail, and a number of other web-based email service providers. After doing so, the company will send multiple reminders to the recipients to join, ostensibly on behalf of LinkedIn members.
http://www.thelawprofessor.com/linkedin-sued-for-hacking-users-and-spamming-contacts/
Four LinkedIn members filed a stunning complaint in federal court last week, accusing the professional social networking giant of hacking members’ email accounts in an effort to increase membership and revenues. The plaintiffs, seeking class action status, claimed that LinkedIn will surreptitiously harvest email addresses using “open” connections to email accounts such as Yahoo! Mail, Microsoft Mail, Google Gmail, and a number of other web-based email service providers. After doing so, the company will send multiple reminders to the recipients to join, ostensibly on behalf of LinkedIn members.
http://www.thelawprofessor.com/linkedin-sued-for-hacking-users-and-spamming-contacts/
734
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Model Sues Getty After Seeing Herself in an HIV-Positive Advertisement
« on: September 23, 2013, 06:31:48 AM »
All good points Lucia..
735
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Model Sues Getty After Seeing Herself in an HIV-Positive Advertisement
« on: September 22, 2013, 04:55:16 PM »
There are many other factors to look at here.
1. The photog may have royally screwed up, by not getting a model release.
2. The photog apparently agreed to Getty's contract, but did not "fully understand the terms"
3. Getty and the model may very well indeed sue the photog. ( I bet 10.00 this happens )..
"Cumbo (the photographer) never received authorization from Nolan to sell the photo after the fashion shoot two years ago, but she’s also arguing that the Division of Human Rights should have contacted Nolan before using her as a poster child for the HIV community.
The above implies a lack of a model release, and Nolan ( the model) will get nowhere going after the Division of Human Rights, after all they properly licensed the image, so again this falls back on the photographer.
1. The photog may have royally screwed up, by not getting a model release.
2. The photog apparently agreed to Getty's contract, but did not "fully understand the terms"
3. Getty and the model may very well indeed sue the photog. ( I bet 10.00 this happens )..
"Cumbo (the photographer) never received authorization from Nolan to sell the photo after the fashion shoot two years ago, but she’s also arguing that the Division of Human Rights should have contacted Nolan before using her as a poster child for the HIV community.
The above implies a lack of a model release, and Nolan ( the model) will get nowhere going after the Division of Human Rights, after all they properly licensed the image, so again this falls back on the photographer.
Official ELI Help Options |
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program |
| Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters. |