Click Official ELI Links
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.


Messages - Ethan Seven

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
I cannot believe how slow this court is.  It might be another year before the defendants actually have to file an answer. 

2
That could be.  It would not surprise me in light of their volume.    They might be playing a little loose in their prelitigation work, but they appear to be very buttoned-up once they head to court.  I do see them prevailing on their motion practice against some big firms.   

3
The article has a few good takeaways.

1.  It helps to get a lawyer.   Anyone who has assets should hire an attorney.
2.  There are often strong legal arguments to be made to dispute liability or damages. 
3.   It can help to engage, ask questions and challenge assumptions or their “facts”

What I would not takeaway is that Higbee and company are not copyright lawyers.   I have no idea about  the validity of what this author is saying or the story behind it.  I do know that Higbee files hundreds of copyright lawsuits.  I have seen several references to the referring claims to other law firms.   There is an undenaiable risk of getting sued.  I have read about 25 or more of Higbee’s pleadings and they are very well written.  The other thing that struck me when reviewing their cases is that they rarely lose on their motions. 

If you are suggesting that they only pursue low hanging fruit and inferring it is safe to ignore these claims, I would strongly disagree.

There are several threads on this forum that demonstrate why these claims are not safe to ignore, unless a person has no assets and does not expect to have any in the future.  Below are two recent ones.

https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/higbee-letter-lawsuits-forum/higbee-attacking-counseling-agency/

https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/higbee-letter-lawsuits-forum/judge-awarded-higbee-associates-$48-000-for-use-of-1-photo!!!



4
A pastor of a church accused.   That is an interesting twist. 

5
Figures, when I finally stop checking, something happens.   

That is an interesting development.   The judge still has not ruled on the motion to dismiss filed by Higbee. 

I am sure there is a strategic reason why RM Media has not responded.  I doubt they would ignore it without a plan.  I am just not sure what it is. 

6
It looks like Lereve lawyered up on this.  Smart move.   Does anyone have insight on what happened?   

7
Spunky, but not a lot of litigation.  Only four cases filed for Masterfile.  None since February of 2017. 

8
The UK does not have a copyright registration regime like the US does. 

Copytrack is based in Germany.  They are not a law firm and do not have standing to litigate in the UK.   However, their customer might.   If’s possible, you can search court records to see if Marco Verch has ever litigated in the UK.  If not, you can be pretty sure that your small case will not be the first.


9
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: ImageRights
« on: January 20, 2019, 12:39:37 AM »
Image Rights
Image Protect
Image Defenders

How many of these similar sounding companies are there?

10
Ditto what BuddaPi said.   Nailed it.

Class action claims seem to be a reoccurring fantasy on this board.  There seems to be at least two common patterns.   One, ironically the idea is posted by someone who makes an admission that supports a reasonable basis for the copyright claim, which would be enough to thwart the class action claim.  Two, the claim is accompanied by a conspiracy theory that is easily explained, such as the other images appearing in Google Image search results do not have watermarks or are a bigger size because they are either licensed versions or unlicensed copies of licensed versions. 

For what it is worth, entrapment is not a defense to copyright infringement or a basis for a class action.   


11
Higbee & Associates posted a link on their website to a court order for a copyright claim involving to RM Media images that were offered via a Creative Commons license.  The judge awarded RM Media nearly $20,000 in damages.  Most of the damages came from copyright and 1202 violations. 

The order is posted at http://www.higbeeassociates.com/practices/copyright-law/

Some takeaways:

The judge awarded an additional $10,000 for violations of section 1202, which pertains to the removal of copyright management information, among other things.   That is more than the $7,500 he awarded for the copyright violations.   

The court did not just rubberstamp RM Media’s request for damages.  The order was detailed.  He gave RM Media a lot, but not everything. The judge even reduced the requested amount of attorneys fees to $1650, which was required by the local rule.

RM Media seems to be comfortable arguing the validity of its claims and business practice of suing when people do not buy a license or comply with the Creative Commons license terms.   It will be interesting to see if this has an impact in their defense in the case against RM Media in NY.  That case has not moved since Higbee filed a motion to dismiss.  I check every week. 

This was a default judgment. The merits and context of default judgments was discussed thoroughly on a similar thread at https://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/higbee-letter-lawsuits-forum/judge-awarded-higbee-associates-$48-000-for-use-of-1-photo!!!/

12
Short answer is that I reached out to Getty to clarify who owns the rights here in the U.S. for a photo a demand letter is requesting. I used an email that has this screen name in it. I didn't want Getty to forward any info along. That and I'd be fairly certain Higbee monitors this site.

That being said, if Getty has exclusive U.S. rights to manage an AFP license, can AFP go outside of their partnership agreement for collections? The Getty EULA states that "You may not assert any right to revenue from a collecting society in respect of photocopying, digital copying or other secondary uses of the licensed content". I would assume Getty would want to have their hand in the pot for any image it licenses based on this language. Getty's email response to me inferred that they were in control of the image rights.

Of course, I'm also curious as to how AFP would verify if their partner licensed an image. Can PicRights/Higbee even access Getty records? Based on my experience with large corporations acquiring ones I've worked for, I'd be surprised to see Getty and AFP so transparent with each other. I'll keep reviewing the site here and let you know how things turn up.

Acoording to Wikipedia, AFP is the third largest news agency in the world.  My guess is that Getty is well aware of what they are doing and that there is coordination between them with regards to checking for or verifying license history.   Though, I am not sure why it is relevant to anyone who does not have a license.   You previously said you do not have money or assets.   AFP and Higbee won’t sue you if you convince them you are not worth suing. 

13
Ethan,

What happened in this thread?  Did the person who started this thread orphan out your responses?  That is rude because it leaves the rest of us stranded. They got their answer and suddenly no one knows what they asked?

Might I suggest that with newbies who have no posting track record, we "regulars" quote the underlying post as part of the response so that if they decide to pull this stunt, we still have  a copy of what was being responded to.

No one likes orphaned threads because the naked responses lack context.

I had never seen that happen before, but I see the problem.  Excellent idea.  I will give it a try

14
The only advice I give is to get an attorney who understands your situation, especially if you have a profitable business to protect.   Your time, sanity, focus and assets are at risk. 

If it were me, assuming I used the image and did not have a license, I would cry hardship and make a modest offer.  Maybe they take it and I get this behind me for cheap.  If they don’t take it, at least I won’t look bad in front of the judge if they file a lawsuit because at least I made an effort to resolve the claim.  The less attractive option for me is to not give it another thought and move on in hopes they do not sue, I like piece of mind.

I do not know many lawyers who send things certified anymore, especially in the age of email, when it is easy to verify if an email was received and opened.  Likewise with the POA, it is not even needed unless they are signing the release on  behalf of the client. 

Best of luck to you.

15
Agence France Presse is one of the largest news agencies in the world.

Hgbee & Associates is a well established law firm who files lots of copyright lawsuits.   

So, I would not expect either would engage in shenanigans, like trying to enforce rights they do not possess or claim to represent parties they do not represent. 

If Agence France Presse is who is doing the enforcement, instead of Getty, you should make sure the release agreement indemnifies you against any copyright claim arising out of the past use of that image.

As far as the POA, it seems like a non-issue, unless you really have a basis to believe that Higbee & Associates is not representing the client.    If Higbee is signing the release agreement, maybe then you ask for a POA that meets legal requirements.   But again, these are not fly-by-night players.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
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.