Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Is is smart to contact the photographer about letters?

« on: August 01, 2011, 09:03:53 AM »

Correct - it would not be the photographer's call  to make as he has normally assigned to Getty or MF the EXCLUSIVE right to enforce the copyright.

just trying to clarify here. i understand assigning the exclusive right to license, but the exclusive right to enforce? does that mean that the photog assign his copyright to Getty? if so, tnat would mean Getty owns the copyright the images? or are you saying that Getty will try and proceed with enforcement, but at the point of filing suite, it would be actually be the photog filing suite against you?

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: $9,000 for 1 image! Photo Attorney Extortion Letter by Carolyn Wright's law firm

« on: July 28, 2011, 08:35:55 AM »

At least I've heard of King & Spalding. I would not underrate her.

funny that is the firm that represents me

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty's lawyer called our attorney! 30 days to pay or they will file suit

« on: June 06, 2011, 03:30:17 PM »

it was indeed a phone call, not a letter he received on May 31 from
McCormack Intellectual Property Business Law firm.  The statements made were that if we didn’t respond
within 30 days a suit would be filed.

now what?

hmmmm strange. I have never seen a letter from an attorney that would "claim" to sue. they usually leave that wide open. and considering McCormack is not Getty, that would really be up to their client, "Getty" if they persue a law suit

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: I received a letter from McCormack today

« on: May 19, 2011, 08:42:57 AM »

i received a letter from getty and then a letter from McCormack himself. just recently recieved a letter from his paralegal. I guess he is too busy to write letters himslef now.

we have requested proof since this ordeal has started and as of yet, have recieve none. they also alluded to using business insurance to cover this cost. we again requested proof.

biggest thing is to be aware of: the differences between copyright and registered copyright. and what your liabilities are with respect to your situation. we will make no offers until we receive the requested proof of registration so that we know what our limits of liabilities are and how we want to proceed. we have never closed the door to settlement

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Strange third letter from Getty, community input requested.

« on: May 03, 2011, 10:55:18 AM »

i am not oscar, but here are my opinions

you have to guess why gi is doing this. my assumption is either they think they can make some money or they are trying to make a point. if you assume that they want to make some money, you have to look at the cost to take someone to court. including the legal fees. obviously they either don't have internal cousel or their internal counsel do not see that it is worth their while. this comes from the people that report letter from outside counsel. mine is one of them and the place that sent me my letter came from the guy that owns the firm, which i can only assume is a firm of 1. at that point, there is not much to split for their time. if they file suite, it is going to take at least a day. even if this were a 50/50 split, the attorney would recieve $500 for the day or so of work. and that is if they are awarded the amount gi as determined as value of the image.

so it is probably not money they are after.

the other reason i see is that they are trying to make a point. they may be sending letters out until they find a large enough company and that they have a solid enough case to make it public. that basically give them a case to base future claims. or they are sending massive amount of letter to "scare" the public. this have value to gi as well. it allows them to perserve their "rights" at a very small expense. to send out letters cost very little. and if they get even 30% of the people to pay, then they prob cover their internal costs. even if they send your case out to outside counsel, sending a couple letters from a single attorney firm cost very little especially if they are form letter.

in the US anyone can sue for any reason, but there is a cost to do so. the cost to sue someone is not cost prohibative. i actually think it is too cheap to sue someone. it makes it too easy just to sue. but at the end of the day gi is a buisness and there has to be value to gi for them to persue legal action or at some point they will no longer be gi. my case would gross gi $3k if they took me to court and won and were awarded everything they claim. it would prob take at least 1 day if not 2 days. at that, it would be cheaper for me to just pay that. it is not even worth my time in lost revenue. but i am going to pursue this to it's limit.

6

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Strange third letter from Getty, community input requested.

« on: April 23, 2011, 08:39:29 AM »

dnsg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>And how can one claim
> damages by registering the image prior to
> litigation but AFTER the alleged copyright
> infringement?

they can't from section 412 of the copyright act:
In any action under this title, other than an action brought for a violation of
the rights of the author under section 106A(a), an action for infringement of the
copyright of a work that has been preregistered under section 408(f) before the
commencement of the infringement and that has an effective date of registration
not later than the earlier of 3 months after the first publication of the work or 1
month after the copyright owner has learned of the infringement, or an action
instituted under section 411(c), no award of statutory damages or of attorney’s
fees, as provided by sections 504 and 505, shall be made for—
(1) any infringement of copyright in an unpublished work commenced
before the effective date of its registration; or
(2) any infringement of copyright commenced after first publication of the
work and before the effective date of its registration, unless such registration
is made within three months after the first publication of the work.

7

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: got my letter

« on: April 23, 2011, 08:23:43 AM »

i am lucky. so far they have not charged me. i think they like the dance. i am sure if this goes into litigation, that I will have to pony up.

8

Getty Images Letter Forum / got my letter

« on: April 19, 2011, 08:54:14 AM »

i received my letter back in Dec 2010 and promptly handed the matter over to my attorneys. they replied back to Getty by asking for proof of copyright. Getty responded with a standard boiler plate. My attorneys descided to not repond to their second demand letter. I have since recieved a letter from McCormack. My attorneys again requested proof of copyright. so far we have had no response. but I am sure they will send something. it looks to be a small firm, since the letter was from Tim McCormack himself. I can only assume that he has very little other business and even a couple $100 will make his day.

I can tell you that the firm that represents me has a full IP practice and also a IP litigation practice. It seams that my attorneys like to press buttons. we will see how many buttons they push.

My business does not run from my website. I have one because I wanted a web presence. I ran an analysis when i recieved my first letter and in the last 2.5 years there was a total of 500 hits to the images in question. the site has been up in 1996 with the same content. I was told by the web designer (who is no longer in business) that the image was in the public domain. who knows. they may have been at that point. but for Getty to persue any action after 14 years seams unjust.