Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter

« on: June 28, 2012, 10:17:01 PM »

I am sure  it has I ask him what he has done to deal with it? 

I was a marketing rep for a collection agency in my 30s and a collector for 10 years.  I can tell you from experience one thing they hate is letters that come from the attorney generals office  reporting bad debt and breaking the collections laws ( calling too much, dunning notices for the same debt from separate places etc) and claim ( debts) that they can't collect.

Nothing wrong with a little repetition to insure we don't miss anything is there and someone else's observations and inquiry?

:*)

K

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter

« on: June 28, 2012, 04:57:14 PM »

Wow they turn over a questionable debt to a collection agency? Did the collection agency report it to the credit reporting agencies? 

Did you send a cease and desist letter to the collection agency that you no longer wished to be contacted about this debt. 

Don't we have something if they report to the credit reporting agency and the debt is invalid or at best questionable?

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter

« on: June 27, 2012, 08:51:43 PM »

Thanks for your advice it seems reasonable to me.  Hopefully it will yield postive results. Reading through the post is quite interesting and informative.  It is sad that these trolls who prey on people give real and legitimate copyright enforcement a bad name.

A few other questions if you would be kind enough to offer advice.

1.) Do you have any results contacting the photographer directly and asking him if he is aware of how they handle his business with repect to this ?  I wouldn't buy a dime worth of his work if he condones this.   I noticed on his page he has no copyright notice on his works at all.  While I understand that when he puts it it in fixed form he owns the copyright it would seem if you are concerned with it you would at least display the notice.  Your thoughts please?

2.) Why don't you have an MF forum?

Thanks

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile Letter

« on: June 27, 2012, 05:47:04 PM »

He ask me to post as he is not internet savvy and not well. 

He wants to know if he should answer the letter indicating that he is aware of this ruling from Oscar Michelen website.

In a decision that could have far-reaching implications for the licensors of digital images, Federal Judge Loretta Preska, the Chief Judge for the Southern District of New York, declared as improper and unenforceable the standard method for registering images by digital image warehouses like Corbis and Masterfile (the biggest of them Getty Images, does not register its images with the Copyright Office).
 
Let me briefly explain the situation:  digital photography has allowed photographers to upload whole catalogues of images into a database and then “assign” their copyright in the images to these large digital image warehouses that then license them for use to media companies, web developers and the like. So if you’re building a website and need the perfect picture of a woman talking on the phone for your cell phone company client, you need only go to Corbis, Masterfile or Getty’s websites, type in “woman on cellphone” and get dozens of shots to choose from. Pick the resolution and use you want, pay the licensing fee and you get to download the image.  The photog and the “warehouse” split the license fee under a written agreement.

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Masterfile Letter

« on: June 27, 2012, 05:16:50 PM »

A friend of mine gets a letter from Masterfile fedex and claimimg they own the copyright to two images on his site.  The site was built in 2004 and the company that designed the site outsource the design to India.  The company was sold over 7 years ago to a new owner.  In the copyright documents MF emailed him there are 100s of Photographers listed on the copyright registration in the compilation.

Of course he took the images down.  Contacted the fellow who owned the company previously and of course he put him in touch with the Indian Outsource company who made the site and used the photos. They said they got them on google and from  a cd. So my friend called his lawyer, but he is so frustrated on the pettiness of this that no one was aware and certainly no one made any significant money on the sale or on his onging website. 

They ask for 12K as if they are the sole reason for the success of any business on the site.  It is just plain sickining that he has to go through this.  He is wondering if the old owner may have liabilty,  the Indian company ( good luck with that I guess) or the new owner.  Should he report this to the consumer protection of the attroney general office of the state?

Thanks
Goodnesssake