Messages

826

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got My Getty Letter - Almost Laughable

« on: July 20, 2013, 12:07:53 PM »

I agree it devalues their images...they would claim they are offering "royalty free" images which are less expensive to license.. Seems they are attempting to not only squeeze you for absurd amounts of money, but also trying to get you to be a customer afterwards..They must take the general public to be complete idiots..they would be much better served to request a reasonable amount to begin with, but that would effect the bottom line..Getty Images, Jonathan Klein and Lisa Wilmer are all shameless money hungry douche bags IMHO.

827

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: copyright questions

« on: July 20, 2013, 12:03:19 PM »

I should clarify why i mentioned the trdemarks in the first place...i was thinking about the scented tree car fresheners company that sued getty because getty was licensing images that had the little hanging trees in some images..the case settled and we don't know the details, but i'm assuming getty paid them something.

828

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: copyright questions

« on: July 20, 2013, 09:30:45 AM »

a photographer friend just shared this with me, and it address one of your questions above..

worth the read, this might fall under "parody" in a court of law...but again it's one of those grey areas..

http://www.onthewingphotography.com/wings/2013/07/20/arne-olav-g-fredriksen-taking-image-theft-to-a-new-level/

829

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: copyright questions

« on: July 20, 2013, 09:11:57 AM »

keep in mind i'm not an attorney, but i'll give this a shot...see below

I was encouraged by another member to post this; while it's not directly related to a getty letter, I do feel that perhaps some of the answers could help everyone out in the long run when it comes to possible copyright infringement.

After getting my Getty Letter I got freaked out.  Lost sleep, felt sick to my stomach, had arguments with the wife, etc.  Then I found this forum and sought out all I could find about copyright rules and laws.

That stuff is fairly easy to come by, albeit the language is sometimes a bit beyond my understanding.

I do understand that the moment something is created that the creator owns the copyright.  I get that.  When a photographer takes a photo, the moment the button is pressed they own the copyright to that photo.  I get that too.  What follows, however, are some questions that I just cannot figure out.  For sake of argument we can assume that no one was contacted to obtain copyrights.

If I have an image that I found on another website and crop it to half it's size and use that, can I do that? NO plain and simple...do NOT take pictures from other websites unless you purchase a license or have express written permission to do so by the copyright owner.

If I post a picture of a  movie poster on my website that I got from my favorite animation studio's website, can I do that? - again NO...DON'T grab stuff from other sites..PERIOD
 
If i'm at the actual movie theater and take a picture of just the movie poster, can I post that on my website?Possibly, as long as you're not infringing on anything that may be "TradeMarked"...a different discussion altogether.

If I'm at the actual movie theater and take a picture with a bunch of friends around the movie poster (with the movie poster in full view), can I post that on my website? - Probably okay to do this, but again you have the possible trademark issue.

If I have an image and add text to it, change some colors, and alter it, can I post that on my website?depends where the image came from, if you grabbed it from another site or a google search, then NO, do some research on derivitive works to get the details on this

If I make a video and I'm wearing a shirt with a famous superhero logo on it, shoes with a famous shoe maker logo on it, and a hat with another famous logo on it, am I infringing upon those copyrights?More so these would be trademark issues, and would depend on if it's a commercial video...thats why on TV you'll often see logo, brands fuzzed out..

If I make an audio (like a radio talk show / podcast) to post online and use.. say.. a clip of a cartoon's voice, or 15 seconds of someone's song, can I do that?would depend on several factors..is it commercial?? is it parody?? is it incorporated with commentary??

as you can see copyright / trademark laws seem to alter depending on the use, and there are some grey area's and there are also black and white areas such as "fair use"...if you're unsure of anything always get yourself educated before taking any chances..

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

I've got a few more questions, but I think I can research them a little to find my answers.  I thank you for your time.

830

P2P/BitTorrent Lawsuits Forum / Re: Is Pic Scout spying on people?

« on: July 20, 2013, 08:46:07 AM »

People should always read the fine print on these "free" sites..

831

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got the Getty Letter

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:53:16 PM »

getty sued TM and they settled, and TM does take care of clients that get letters..

I don't know of any site where you can ask copyright related questions, but I would here, Oscar does pop in from time to time, and he has given us many free IP law related lessons, and we also have some pretty minds here in the forum..ask away, worst case is we don't know and we all learn.

832

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Question About Getty Images Own Copyright Infringement Liability

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:49:48 PM »

and likely they won't care...the picscout bot and picscout in general are not breaking any laws by spidering / crawling domains. Now if they breached a password protected domain, that would be a different story, but I have not seen that. I have gone so far as to "bait" server with images in a public folder and a protected folder..picscout grabbed the public image, but did not breach the private folder.. I also don't think them crawling sites and comparing images would be considered copyright infringement.

833

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I don't own a commercial website

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:42:13 PM »

the only thing i'll add here, ,is that I never said to "settle up"...even tho it may have come across that way..

834

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Whois Information

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:38:41 PM »

they could simply subpeona the registar and the "private whois" is useless...godaddy has been known to release private info with a simple email request..

835

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I emailed letter on Jun 6th but have not received any answer yet

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:36:45 PM »

don't worry about timmy's deadline, it's a scare tactic, call the office again on monday, and maybe send another email..Oscar has probably been in trial all week...you have to realize this is not his business, and that "real cases" come first...you need not worry..

836

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got the Getty Letter

« on: July 19, 2013, 10:33:31 PM »

i think boxed art is owned by template monster...I would dump it in their lap, before wasting your own time with this..If the image was part of the template, then they should step up to the plate...abd getty is well aware of this, as there was a sttlement between them and templatemonster..

837

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I don't own a commercial website

« on: July 19, 2013, 12:26:26 PM »

This is a good example of what happens when people jump the gun and respond, before getting educated...they sent the letter to legal dept @ yuji books, which on paper does not exist, they can't sue a non-existant company, but now that you replied to them, they now have a name other than a bogus cmade uo company name.. They won't take your offer of 120.00, they simply want more. They won't listen to your explanation.. The major mistake you made was "taking the image from another website" i'm hoping you did not explain this getty, as this is basically an admission of guilt in their eyes.. I suggest reading more info here, getting educated, then make a decison on how to proceed...keep in mind they will keep hounding you for the next 3 yrs., If you can't stomach that thought, you can always pay them, or enlist in Oscar's letter program..

838

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New Member of the Getty Family

« on: July 19, 2013, 07:26:39 AM »

Saw this yesterday and didn't get a chance to post it.

Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Klein today announced the appointment of Ellen Desmarais as General Manager of iStockphoto

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/15/5569175/getty-images-names-ellen-desmarais.html

Perhaps folks that get letters from IStock, should just go to the top and reply directly to Ellen..Let her know what kind of scumbags she's working for.

839

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got My Getty Letter - Almost Laughable

« on: July 19, 2013, 07:23:52 AM »

I don't think the Letter program is an option for you, as you are in Canada, and Oscar is a US Attorney. Explaining your points to them will gain you nothing...and I strongly suggest you don't admit to anything..they won't care who owned the business, they won't care who uploaded the image....unless you have a DMCA Agent in place there is no safe harbor. They would however need to file suit where you are, which makes this case a more expensive one for them, thus diminishing the chances of them filing suit.

840

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is there a definitive IP range for PICSCOUT - i want to kill the spider!

« on: July 19, 2013, 07:18:08 AM »

can you explain how tineye is telling you whether images are public domain or copyrighted?

I didn't explain myself fully on this one.

The images in question have been on my web site for years, as a tribute to my father. They are pictures of the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Air Medal. I didn't remember when or where I got them, so I used TinEye to see if these pictures appeared anywhere else on the web. They did; and the links that TinEye came back with were federal government web sites (if I recall), and these web sites clearly state that there is no copyright restriction for the use of these images.

Thanks for the clarification! Getty has been known to accuse folks of infringement over public domain images.. If the images on those government sites you mention are indeed the same, you could sternly point this out to getty, and advise them if they continue their harassment, you will file complaints with the Washington Attorney General, and you will also invoice them for the time you have been wasting on this matter.