Messages

1

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 09, 2012, 06:03:16 AM »

Hi Guys

I am away on family business at the moment but thought I should try and cap the conspiracy theories at once!

The reason for change from we and us to me is because Matthew asked me for MY informed opinion - which is what you've been getting - for better or worse!

I have never hidden the fact that copyrightinfringement.org.uk is owned by Liz Ward. After I found and met them I offered myself to help the fight - NO MONEY!!!
It is operated by Paul Traynor who works for himself - read into that what you will but I found him very helpful and he often hasn't charged people at all!
When I found them and met up I offered to do anything to help and subsequently re-designed the website and made the video.

There is nothing either secret or underhand about any of this. It maybe that I need to start my own website which will have some basic information - and no forum!!

I would refer people to this one or something.

What I have been trying to get across to people and obviously failed - my bad - as you would say is this;

1, Copyrightinfringement.org.uk is not a huge profit making organisation. Liz Ward came up with the idea and is a specialist in her field. She is responsible for producing the template letters and supports the work with follow up letters when necessary. This can save an individual hundreds of pounds or more because just signing up with any solicitor in the uk will probably cost at least £300 because of regulations plus they may not have expertise in this area. It could end up costing thousands with no result in which case you might as well send Getty a cheque now.

2, This is a 2 year deal and encapsulates follow up letters and representation in court on a no win no fee basis. Normally, the losing side pays the costs! Ok this is not a guarantee but what is?

In about a week or less the website will have new copy and I will post a more comprehensive post on here. I am just a bit tied up for the next few days.

I like a good conspiracy theory myself but hey give me a break! Liz Ward is a Solicitor subject to the SRA Solicitors Regulatory Authority in the UK - she's hardly the mafia!

Like I keep saying I love having informed and specialist legal advice behind my defence. Others can do what they like.

2

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 08, 2012, 03:16:17 AM »

Hi Guys

I do not think that Getty is some kind of unassailable giant.
Maybe in some eyes you think I am scaremongering - I am very concerned because I don't think you can assume that things will stay the same for ever and maybe I should have got all the details first but even Khans link puts the damages limit at £500,000 not £500. I don't really know yet but I will be finding out!

Lets make my position very clear.

Do I think that Getty are a threat - yes.
Do I think that people should prepare properly and answer the letters - yes.

I don't receive any payment from copyrightinfringement.org.uk or Liz Ward the solicitor. I am not here to scaremonger but I am concerned that if you don't respond to the letters then legally you could be in deep trouble eventually.

This is a personal decision that individuals need to make and I am not in the business of wasting my time. I have responded personally and will use copyrightinfringement because I want the best possible preparation in case I am attacked. If nothing happens fine - thats great but doing nothing does not suit me and whatever some of you may think I know that nothing is guaranteed in life so my advice would be to at least respond to Getty or the others and make an open offer to settle IF they can provide proof that they have the right to charge you.

Some of you seem happy that you have established that Getty are a bunch of no-hopers and will never succeed. Maybe you are right - I am not prepared to take that chance because they can't stay dumb forever.

I am in the firing line myself and I will always try and do what is best for me. I also care that companies like Getty are out there trying to put down the small people and extort money from them. I HATE this but I am not going to make it easier for them by muttering and doing nothing.

Like I keep saying - this is my opinion - like it or not and I opened this post to try and let people know that there was something else that they could do as an option. Yes, it costs a bit of money but frankly, I was ecstatic when I found someone with legal knowledge to help and advise me.

As far as Liz Ward is concerned - yes she is a solicitor and business woman and like all of that breed she wants to make money. I don't have a problem with this if she saves me thousands for a fairly minimal amount.

We all make our own decisions!

3

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 07, 2012, 01:40:23 PM »

Hi Guys

Been away on business and so not had a chance to log in but just had a quick look.

A couple of points;

1, Admitting that you used the images on your site is not the same thing as pleading guilty.

2, Making an open offer to GI subject to them proving they have the right to ask for money is not pleading guilty. In the UK if they do not respond to your open offer it will be relayed in court and can be used against them!

Since I last logged there has been a new development in the UK. A new court division called  the Patents County Court has seeming been agreed. Starting from October 2012 this will streamline the the cases involving copyright infringement and prove a lot less costly for Getty and the others to take people to court. Incidentally, I am not telling you anything that Getty do not know. Some of their UK solicitors are already threatening to use this.

Obviously, people can make up their own minds but it does mean that people who ignore the letter will be at much greater risk.

I understand that many of you do not agree with me about the whole admission of images thing but I think that in some ways it is a question of semantics i.e. They usually have evidence of the images on your site but as we know they have to prove they have the rights etc. The inadvertent use of copyright images is the key in a UK court. In my view and from my experience it is wise not to deny the obvious!

I will post more about this new court soon when I have details.

Before someone jumps in to say Getty will still be frightened of losing and setting precedent my understanding is that due to the low cost nature of the process and the numbers of people who are ignoring the letters this could still be a problem.

In the Uk courts they will still look at the facts of each individual case and a total lack of action will hurt the defence.

This is my opinion!

4

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 05:54:50 PM »

Hi Soylent Green

In one of my first posts on this site I said that I wouldn't have a forum on the UK site because things start going round in circles and posters start abusing each other.

I think that you have just proved my point!

I have a point of view which maybe correct or incorrect. The same applies to you. It is not made up and whilst what you say about evidence being available pre-trial is absolutely correct I think we do need to speculate about what Getty might do and try and defend against it. Its called good planning.

By the way I love the photo of you in your hat - very cute!

5

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 04:32:06 PM »

Hi Matthew

I just finished writing a long response and then your new one popped up before posting. I had actually written something with the same basic principle as you. However, you made the case in a more effective way.

I totally agree denial is not the way to go if you want to appear credible!

6

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 03:33:37 PM »

Just got in and saw the responses.

I must check my postings a little more carefully prior to posting - the points were not necessarily in any particular order!
In letters that have been sent by me and others It has been stated that Getty must provide proof of ownership or the rights to sell the image. This is not the full legal blurb obviously.

However, it is true to say that I have put in writing that should they provide this evidence then I will pay and made an open offer to this extent based on the general cost of similar images available for stock libraries.

This is an appropriate tactic under UK Law!

Sooner or later Getty will start providing this evidence and then where will you be?
You can deny everything until the cows come home but you really have to think beyond that point.
Once you are in a courtroom having said, up until that point, that they have evidence which they now produce you can complain bitterly but you have not addressed the point about damages and the real costs/value of the photographs.
I don't know about the US but in the UK courts tend towards looking at the credibility of the prosecution and the accused. This can play a major part in determining damages and costs.
If a case is presented in the right way right from the beginning then the chances of success are much higher.
For people who have not addressed the letters properly or ignored them completely then the chances are that Getty/Solicitor will be awarded much more money than would otherwise be the case. By accepting that you don't know the origin of the images and are willing to pay something if the owner provides proof of ownership it makes you look much more honest and credible.

This is my own point of view but the legal tactics employed by copyrightinfringement.org.uk are not dissimilar. They are however properly worded!

7

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 07:38:02 AM »

Hi Buddhapi

This maybe terminology but in the UK ignorance of the law is no excuse and I think that in some cases, like mine where I right-clicked on small google image icons I had no idea that I was not allowed to use the images. They were of Australia and an image of the world as this was a travel agents site so they were small images for illustrative purposes.

Anyway, I can't and won't deny that I used them so the only questions are;

1, Did I get any financial reward = no!
2, Would I be prepared to pay a reasonable financial penalty - I found very similar images on istockphoto and others for less than £10 each - yes, I would. I would even have considered paying a fine of say £100 per image - I would never expect to pay nothing for a mistake, however genuine, that I made. As a matter of fact I only received a total of £500 for the whole website - which was done for a friend of a friend.

However, I would pay nothing to someone who can't prove that they have rights to charge for using an image and likewise I will not pay huge amounts to someone who is using the whole situation as a ploy to make money!

I understand your reticence and in many cases people did think that they did have the right to use an image but unfortunately can't prove this anymore because they don't have receipts and/or the image was on a template or the website designer doesn't care etc

In other words there are a huge variety of reasons why people are being approached by Getty and these have to be pursued individually. I can only speak from a personal perspective but I am not scared of Getty and am happy to stand before a magistrate/jury and put my case.

My view is that in an English court they will have to prove the value of the images and support their case for damages as they will have to prove that I sued these images for financial gain - which I did not.

This does mean that the letters to getty have to be carefully worded and which, despite my aggressive stance, I am happy to have a lot of legal  support behind me.

8

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 04:04:54 AM »

In my previous post I made a mistake it should have read "tracing the origin of these images" - not letters!
Sorry.

9

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 05, 2012, 03:45:37 AM »

Hi Matthew

You do make some compelling points - so this is how I see it;

1, Whilst we produce template letters - they are all personalised to the specific circumstances e.g. in my case I am the website designer and I was very keen to relieve the clients of the Getty stress and so was able to use some legal terminology to ensure that Getty came after me. It was interesting that the UK based solicitors who came after me did not appear to have any copies of previous correspondence that I had with Getty direct. As many people have surmised I believe it to be a 'numbers' game of speculative invoicing. All the correspondence form them was poorly structured and packaged.

2, This does not mean that you are safe if you ignore. As previously mentioned the British courts would probably take a dim view of people who ignore due legal process. There was one 'case' in the North of England where I believe that although the accused took the images down they ignored the correspondence. They 'settled' on the court steps so that the case was never tested in court. Even if you respond aggressively, as I did, there is no guarantee that there will be a final end to it as I found out two years after I thought it was all over. However, I don't think that the courts in the UK will appreciate a 2 year gap for no reason plus ignoring the original correspondence.

3, Evidential proof provided by Getty. We all know that one of the key areas of defence (In both the UK and US) is the demand for proof of ownership by Getty that the images have been properly registered. Currently, they do not seem to be in a position to provide this but they are not stupid and it may well be that all this time they have been busy properly registering these images.

4, There is an argument that you should be taken to the small claims court which has a maximum limit of £5,000. However, due to the nature of the claim it is much more likely that any test cases would be heard in a much higher court.

5, There is a general assumption - with which I agree to some extent - which is that Getty will never take anybody to court as the resulting decision will immediately set a precedent. I think that there is a lot of truth in this as Getty have so much to lose should any decision go against them.

6, So, the basic elements of defence are;

a, Taking the images down.
b, Admitting the offence but offering a much more reasonable amount per image.
c, asking for proof of ownership of the images

There is the usual legal framework around this but in essence this is what is covered. Copyrightinfringement.org.uk have ways of of making these letters more effective and will cover your correspondence for up to 2 years.

I want to talk about the no win no fee but need to confirm wording with Liz the solicitor.

I know that many people are shocked, distraught and incredibly upset when the letters are received and, even if the images were originally purchased correctly Getty don't care unless you can provide proof.  They don't care anyway and tracing the origin of these letters is incredibly difficult. Getty have acquired a huge number of photo libraries in the last few years - why?
The obvious answer is to use with their picscout software to find innocent users of these images and then claim back large amounts.

Where I take slight issue with you Matthew is in the case of self-representation. I am sure that you are excellent at this but most people would not survive in a courtroom atmosphere in the UK. I can be pretty aggressive myself but recognise that you want the right person attacking with knowledge.

I agree that many solicitors don't have either the knowledge and/or the 'fire' to do this but I think it is important to try and find one.

It is interesting regarding the reputation of solicitors. In the UK we have the SRA the solicitors Regulatory Authority and in theory you could complain to them if you felt that a solicitor was behaving unethically. I think that would be a big job.
There are ombudsmen and the like but frankly they have not proven useful in most cases as this is such a specific allegation and a complicated area - copyright law and the web.

I must go now but will happily respond to any queries!

10

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 04, 2012, 07:04:59 PM »

Hi Matthew

We are currently rewriting some of the information on the website which, hopefully will be up in the next few days. I will also be away on business so I will not be able to reply very quickly to any questions but I think it would be a great idea if Liz was to write a piece which I will ask her to do for the following reasons;

1, I am not a solicitor / lawyer and am not in a position to give advice.
2, I think that Liz is very cautious in what she says (She is a solicitor after all!) and she is concerned that Getty don't pick up too much of the strategy in terms of what we are trying to achieve and how we go about trying to beat them.

I can say that the defence is not a million miles away from what you do in the US and one of the advantages (I Believe) under UK law is that the courts will apply what they consider to be just damages and it is highly unlikely that the thousands and thousands mentioned by 'trolls' and others would be applied.

One of the issues that really bothers me and did back in 2009 when my client first received the dreaded letter was the number of people on the web who were advocating totally ignoring the Getty letter. I think that the courts will always look down on someone who has never responded to the letter. My original letter was cobbled together from what I had seen on the web and a bit of UK law. This worked until July last year when I received a new demand from a UK solicitor who was acting on Getty's behalf. This was when I found copyrightinfringement.org.uk

It seems that Getty have approached a number of solicitors in the UK, probably on some kind of commission basis, to attack locally. These solicitors seem to be free to adapt their approach to suit their own interpretation of the situation and can vary a bit in method and wordage.

Anyway, when I return from my trip I will have a chat with Liz and see if I can ask her for some comments.

Thank you very much for your understanding.

11

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 04, 2012, 02:19:19 PM »

First of all - whoops!!
I made a mistake on the video I posted earlier and had to take it down and edit then repost! The link is now

I have already imbedded the new video on the website copyrightinfringement.org.ukso all is ok!

Secondly, thanks to Soylentgreen for your comments. I'm glad that you reminded me that troll is the word - I had forgotten.

Thirdly to Khan - I appreciate your comments and agree that a lot of solicitors are not that good but I would say and you can listen to the video that in the UK Liz Ward is at the forefront of her field with regard to Intellectual Property Rights and particularly the situation in the UK with Getty.

It is probably not relevant but after I first met her I was so impressed that I introduced her to a friend of mine who was suffering with an ex-employer in an unrelated field. To say that she is a 'tough cookie' is a bit of an understatement and the ex-employers case was thrown out with costs awarded against them!

This may sound weird but on one level I would like Getty to take me to court because I feel confident that they would never get the outrageous amounts of money they are demanding!

12

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty in the UK

« on: March 04, 2012, 09:36:55 AM »

Hi Matthew

I apologise for saying we are doing the same thing as you. I was so keen to get the video information out there that my post was a bit short and perhaps misleading.

What I would say is that we are 'fighting' getty and their obnoxious letters in the UK. I myself am a 'victim' and when I found copyrightinfringement.org.uk and eventually met them it was the first time that I felt that there was somebody there to help!

I offered to help them with both website and video work so that the message could be spread. I take no payment for this but obviously the solicitor and company need some finance to keep the whole project going.

We are in the process of redoing the website and the offer involved but I would stress that Liz will be defending participants on a no win no fee basis should it come to that so there is perhaps more to the offer than at first appears. Also the template letters will continue to be supplied for the two year period. We are also offering an enhanced service where we will do the letters from the company as opposed to supplying them to the participants.

I don't believe that yet another forum would be that helpful as a, you have an excellent forum on this site and there are many more in the UK. What tends to happen is that after a while the whole thing starts going round in circles and then forum members start abusing each other. The FSB (Federation of Small Businesses UK) forum is a case in point. Then you get the Getty 'moles' attacking. One on the FSB forum who appeared to be a Getty mole called themselves 'Bambi' which was quite amusing.

Anyway, I apologise again for appearing to offer what you do but personally speaking, although the cost may be higher here than the service you are offering I still feel it is worth offering.

Best Regards

Nick

13

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Getty in the UK

« on: March 04, 2012, 04:35:15 AM »

Dear Matthew

Just to let you know that in the UK our team is doing much the same as you www.copyrightinfringement.org.uk with solicitor Liz Ward.

We now have a video with the link  which is also on our website.

I know you get a lot of contact from the uk too so it would help if you can let these people know about us!

Best Regards

Nick Bloomfield