Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trollog Defined

« on: June 10, 2013, 04:13:28 AM »

thanks for the heads up on p10 glad i didnt add it in the end. I have sent them a reply outlining everything else here. Now i guess i just have to wait

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trollog Defined

« on: June 09, 2013, 09:29:57 AM »

thanks again for the reponses here..

JUST A NOTE.. this is not from getty (would appear i maybe posted in the wrong thread? sorry)
this is from CEG TEK International ("CEG") represents AKM Images / GSI Media,

Also, i am not in the US, i am in the UK

Oh and the claim they sent clearly shows it was a hotlinked image.. i didnt get a screen shot and cannot see the post as i mentioned it was delete long before recieving this. BUT the claim contains PAGE = Mydomain FILE = 3rdParty

Maybe i will take your advice on mentioning perfect10 in the hope of stopping this sooner

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trollog Defined

« on: June 09, 2013, 07:56:21 AM »

thanks for the advice, my theory was at least repsond

without sounding smug, i intiend to simply outline the facts

Its a community driven site, as such the images where posted by a user of the website
All images where hosted by a 3rd party, I have never hosted any copies of the images in question
The thread / post / page in question was removed long before any notices where given

I realize because i foolish didn't have the correct DMCA notice i dont have much to say in regards to "somebody else posted it" but im well aware that even so i still never committed any offense.. 

not 100% sure if i will mention google v perfect10, at this point or not

thanks again for the advice,

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trollog Defined

« on: June 08, 2013, 01:32:45 PM »

thanks for the fast reply, I guess that does explain the lack of dmca take down request before hand. Although its never been an issue in the past (i guess times have changed, people are greedy)

as i say, No image was ever hosted by me, and even tho i may not have the safe harbor of dmca, the page containing the link was removed long before being contacted (months maybe years, not minutes)

so what do u suggest now?

IGNORE and wait.. guessing these are sent using a robot system?
Reply and tell them that it was never on my server, was already removed and i do not admit any wrong doing?

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Trollog Defined

« on: June 08, 2013, 12:02:38 PM »

Hey i know this is an old thread, but i didnt feel it was needed to start a new one. I have began to receive a series of complains from these guys via email today, listing a bunch of images posted a single thread by the users of my forum.

I have had NO DMCA notices, The images where hosted by a 3rd party NOT ME, they where posted by a user of my forum (anyone is free to register)
WORST OF ALL....... the time stamp in for the forum thread / images is dated back from 2011.  When i tried to check the thread, it has been removed. I cannot be 100% but would guess it was removed at some point in 2011 as i changed the direction of the website at that point

So seriously, DO THEY HAVE A LEG TO STAND ON? chasing me for a post made and deleted over 2 years ago containing images posted and hosted by 3rd parties?

Do i respond to the emails and tell them that? or do i wait for them to send me snail mail? Its crazy there must be 20 or more images listed, in the same thread, of the same celeb, from the same shoot

6

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another UK Getty 'Love Letter'

« on: May 21, 2012, 06:47:29 AM »

Quick update, i sent them reply explaining the situation, no money was made etc (which is totally true).

but after rewriting the letter a few times i couldnt seem to finish it with a decent "so this is what i want to do".. In the end i offered them 20% of there orignal price. Which they accepted, I must say soon as i recieved the reply i did think "DAMIT I SHOULD OF OFFERD THEM 1% or NOTHING AT ALL" but i am still alot better off than i was 2 weeks ago, and have a big weight of my shoulders

Fact is, i offered what i was happy to accept OBVIOUSLY i would of prefered ZERO but i just wanted it over and done with.. 

thanks to all those at ELI, for the help and infomation.

7

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another UK Getty 'Love Letter'

« on: May 08, 2012, 04:33:29 PM »

I am playing fair and by the book lets just hope they do

Getty doesn't play fair and Getty long ago tossed out the book of right and wrong. It's all about money for them and nothing else. Welcome to the merry go round.

Something i am learning quickly.. Will be sending them an new letter containing the above info in the next couple of days, will keep you updated as to the responce

8

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another UK Getty 'Love Letter'

« on: May 08, 2012, 01:47:18 PM »

Thanks for the reply, YEP the site made nothing, Zero, Zilch SWEAT FA..  I think your reply has made me definetly think I have got to at least let them know my position on this, the only fly in my ointment is the fact i am no longer in contact with the charity (as it was a one off). But the chairty is still running and the image / and website both clearly mention it was all for a good cause..

I guess at this point what do i have to lose? I am playing fair and by the book lets just hope they do

9

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another UK Getty 'Love Letter'

« on: May 08, 2012, 01:17:29 PM »

Hey i have been lurking round these boards since i got my getty letter! Looked all over the net and decided this was the most sensible action to take (SEE ABOVE)

Well, i got a return today!
the basics are that they are happy i contacted them, and followed on to tell me "Copyright exsists upon the moment of creation".. and how they represent the photographer and claim the image was is only avaliable exclusively via the website.. NOW to me this isnt proof?? this is just "im telling you we have it" not "here it is?"

Also, they told me the calcuated the price by taking in to consideration possible revenue lost by photograther + the time it took to pursue me (that 1x letter now 2) .. they also offered me a 25% reduction to settle this week..

SO, what do i do now??
I asked for proof they had exclusive rights to it?
they pretty much claimed they did, and went on to say that should i dispute it, i should have written consent from the aforemention photograther

I asked how they worked out the price?
they told me, weither i agree with it is another matter..

Right now im stuck, OK i just saved myself £200 by contacting them, but they are still asking a huge amount for 1x image,

Do i pay up and shut up? or do i push for a bigger reduction?

I know they don't care and im sure they hear it all the time, but the website it was on was made for FREE for a local one off charity event.
No revenue was made by me or the organisers. The image was used innocently by a 3rd party, I understand we often have to pay for our mistakes, but I still think what they are asking for is way to much. I found VERY similar images (100s of them) on various other photo websites for less then £1 along with plenty for free

*note.. SORRY if i have hijacked this thread, I just figured as i had used the advice i got from this topic i should give back what it has acheived so far..