946
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Famous letter in.... the Netherlands!
« on: March 01, 2010, 07:08:41 AM »
Thanks gang - No news is good news
| 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.
947
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Need Help in the UK.
« on: February 23, 2010, 11:30:29 AM »
Wow, didn't realize that,. so sorry. I know that LimeOne is a law firm that has handled some of these issues in the UK, maybe they can be of service.
948
UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Need Help in the UK.
« on: February 23, 2010, 10:04:58 AM »
There are numerous posts here about the UK issue and a link on our homepage to the FSB forum which is a UK-based forum with literally thousands of posts about the UK issue. Good Luck!
949
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Famous letter in.... the Netherlands!
« on: February 18, 2010, 10:37:30 AM »
Interesting
950
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Famous letter in.... the Netherlands!
« on: February 17, 2010, 04:12:43 PM »
Getty does not register their images with the copyright office so you won't find them. I cannot comment on the rest as I am not familiar with copyright law in the Netherlands. What I can say is that to my knowledge Getty has not filed suit there ever over their images. I would take a wait and see approach before engaging them. You may find some info from some of the other posts about this issue from your countrymen. Good luck and thanks for the post.
951
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter in Canada
« on: February 16, 2010, 03:36:55 PM »
Thats hard to assess without more information. How long was the image up, when did they register it? What proof do you have that a third party acquired the images for you? etc etc I would be glad to talk to you about it as I don't want to set forth all of the negotiating issues and what the standard result is for an image or two as I am sure Masterfile monitors this blog.
952
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter in Canada
« on: February 16, 2010, 01:12:42 PM »
Well, Jeff, Masterfile will sue so you are best off trying to work out a reasonable settlement with them. I agree that the number they are at now is very high and no court would ever award them $6,000 for a single image. I would suggest gathering some information about your site (page views, traffic, etc) to try and convince Masterfile that the use was minimal. Also any proof that you paid a third party to the site might help convince them that you would have an innocent infringement argument. If you like, we'd be glad to help you with it as well, as we have many cases against Masterfile in our office. Call me at 516 248 8000 to discuss it at your convenience
953
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Corbis v Starr
« on: February 16, 2010, 01:05:46 PM »
Thanks for your kind words Lettered. I think the main problem is that most lawyers won't look past the small value of each claim independently and are just giving short shrift to folks who may be liable for a few thousand dollars. They neither realize or care that many of these businesses can't afford to pay two, three or four thousand dollars, so they just blow them off by saying "you're liable, you have no defense."
954
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Beware! Corbis Demand Letter Now Prevalent !
« on: February 15, 2010, 05:19:56 PM »
well said
955
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Corbis v Starr
« on: February 15, 2010, 05:19:38 PM »
Dear Lettered:
I am aware of this case, but as you correctly stated, nothing has really happened yet. All the court said was that Corbis proved it owned the copyright to the images and that both the end user and designer were jointly responsible. Had we been the attorneys, we would have saved our clients substantial fees and conceded to all of that as it was clearly within the law.
What is important about the case is that it allowed the claim to go forward as to each individual photos even though it was registered as a collection. It still is unclear whether the court means to award separate damage for each picture. That we need to see the result on damages; I think it will be error to do so.
On the wilfullness issue, this decision is positive in that the court says since no one knows where the images exactly came from and Corbis cannot prove that it had a watermark on it, the issue of wilfullness has to go to trial. More importantly, the court rejected Corbis' argument that the defendants should have known it was copyrighted and therefore acted willfully. The judge said in that case there would never be innocent infringement.
So the case boils down to damages - what else is new. That's what I have been trumpeting on this site for nearly two years now. (I hope that the defendants' lawyers made a plausible settlement offer prior to litigation as that will help on the attorney's fees issue.)
The parties have a mediation conference scheduled for March and a trial set for April. The defendants need to do their homework and hire an expert on "value" as well as try to establish that "fair market value" and not Corbis' inflated pricing scheme should prevail. I would expect that the parties will likely settle during the mediation conference. I will keep you posted.
I am aware of this case, but as you correctly stated, nothing has really happened yet. All the court said was that Corbis proved it owned the copyright to the images and that both the end user and designer were jointly responsible. Had we been the attorneys, we would have saved our clients substantial fees and conceded to all of that as it was clearly within the law.
What is important about the case is that it allowed the claim to go forward as to each individual photos even though it was registered as a collection. It still is unclear whether the court means to award separate damage for each picture. That we need to see the result on damages; I think it will be error to do so.
On the wilfullness issue, this decision is positive in that the court says since no one knows where the images exactly came from and Corbis cannot prove that it had a watermark on it, the issue of wilfullness has to go to trial. More importantly, the court rejected Corbis' argument that the defendants should have known it was copyrighted and therefore acted willfully. The judge said in that case there would never be innocent infringement.
So the case boils down to damages - what else is new. That's what I have been trumpeting on this site for nearly two years now. (I hope that the defendants' lawyers made a plausible settlement offer prior to litigation as that will help on the attorney's fees issue.)
The parties have a mediation conference scheduled for March and a trial set for April. The defendants need to do their homework and hire an expert on "value" as well as try to establish that "fair market value" and not Corbis' inflated pricing scheme should prevail. I would expect that the parties will likely settle during the mediation conference. I will keep you posted.
956
Getty Images Letter Forum / Beware! Corbis Demand Letter Now Prevalent !
« on: February 14, 2010, 11:40:11 AM »
So digital image giant Corbis, owned by Bill Gates, has entered the infringement arena in a big way. We have been contacted by several businesses who have received strong demand letters from Corbis' attorney, Jefferey Loop of NYC white-shoe firm Carter, Ledyard. In typical Microsoft fashion, Mr. Gates has decided to use a machine gun to swat a fly. The demands are around $4-$6K per image and they give a very short leash or threaten litigation. I will keep you posted as our case progresses.
957
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: It's arrived in the Czech Republic!
« on: February 14, 2010, 11:32:39 AM »
Hey RH:
Thanks for letting us know that this pesky problem has reached the beautiful Czech Republic. Its hard to give you any advice because I am not familiar with Czech copyright law but I doubt that you will get him to change his business practices. He is likely making a nice amount of money off of this program and playing up his connection with Getty to his clients and prospective customers. So I don't see him losing that without some incentives. I would hold firm against paying him anything especially with the situation you describe. That's the best way to get him to stop, by not making it worth his while financially. Good Luck and keep us posted please!
Thanks for letting us know that this pesky problem has reached the beautiful Czech Republic. Its hard to give you any advice because I am not familiar with Czech copyright law but I doubt that you will get him to change his business practices. He is likely making a nice amount of money off of this program and playing up his connection with Getty to his clients and prospective customers. So I don't see him losing that without some incentives. I would hold firm against paying him anything especially with the situation you describe. That's the best way to get him to stop, by not making it worth his while financially. Good Luck and keep us posted please!
958
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is Getty in violation of MY copyright?
« on: February 02, 2010, 03:09:47 PM »
This "creative" approach has been put out there before and the main point you need to recall is that the law does not require Getty to watermark, or put a copyright notice on it. The law USED to be that way but it was changed many, many years ago.So there is nothing illegal about what Getty is doing unfortunately and showing you (and just you) a captured screen image of your site is not a commercial use.
959
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trying to contact Mr.Michelen
« on: February 01, 2010, 04:35:29 PM »
Got them Jason and am working on it!
960
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is Getty in violation of MY copyright?
« on: February 01, 2010, 04:35:00 PM »
No, it was not making an infringing commercial use of it, it was copying it to show you that it contained their image on it. That would be a permissible use
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. |