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 - UnfairlyTargeted

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: email from Leslie Burns
« on: July 27, 2018, 06:04:55 PM »
And for not thinking of photographers who would conceive of such things, well criminals are conceiving of new things all the time, so I'd be no surprise that a guy who's done some time would be doing something like that.  Isn't interesting what you find on the internet sometimes?

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: email from Leslie Burns
« on: July 27, 2018, 06:02:32 PM »
This image.
25.7 billion matches.  My apologies for being wrong on the number.

Search for japanese garden maple and you'll find a few thousand almost identical images taken by everyone and their grandmother.  I stopped scrolling after the first few pages.

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: email from Leslie Burns
« on: July 27, 2018, 12:52:30 PM »
My point is you can't trust these trolls.

In the case of Tom Schwabel, the image he tried to extort me with was a copy of a common image in most every photographer's portfolio, one that was freely available on hundreds of sites.  And his specific image?  It is on 22 BILLION websites.  How did it get there?  Easy!  He seeded it there.  Intent to protect copyright has to be accounted for.  If someone is out spreading their copyrighted work around with intent to cause people to use it, seems the courts should not find that infringement has occurred.

Do your research on the "photographer" making the claim before you think of replying.  You might be surprised by what you find.

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: email from Leslie Burns
« on: July 26, 2018, 09:16:10 PM »
Whether the image is actually registered is not inconsequential.  It makes a difference.  If this so-called artist has falsely claimed the image is registered and it isn't actually in whatever number was provided to you, then they have no basis to make a claim for much of anything.  Maybe a few dollars.  Certainly not $7500.  These registrations are sloppy, especially if they are batches of images.  So it could be a registration full of dog shit pics.

Many trolls like the granddaddy of image seeders Tom Schwabel have a whole business model out of spreading images around the web and lie in wait to cash in on innocent people like yourself who just wanted to share an image.  It's way more common than you think and it's calculated and planned - they discuss it in photo sharing forums - how they hope people take their images so they buy fancy new lenses or in Schwabel's case, go on some fancy high-priced trip.  Unless the photo is some famous celebrity or done by Ansel Adams, it isn't worth more than a few dollars.  Go on any photo library and you'll find copies of similar images for a couple dollars. 

And I don't give a shit if they're legit, no image is worth more than a few dollars online and this ass should be ashamed of himself for asking that amount for your personal twitter.  The correct thing for him to do was send you a note to take the image down, no bad feelings.  Maybe if it was used in Apple's homepage logo, you could ask that much.  Maybe.  But even then doubtful.

I hope to hell you don't fork over any money.  I mean what a f'ing asshole.

He's got a real day job and it isn't photography.  Just another parasite looking to cash in:

Just like Tom Schwabel... BTW, Tom, was that you yesterday trying to call me out?

Is this person really a photographer or just some social media amateur looking to cash in?  If it's the latter, this person needs to be made into an example so he doesn't contact a lawyer or one of these services again!

As well as the "photographers" who hire these lawyers.

We need to make it clear that contacting a lawyer over an image on the web is a move that you will regret for the rest of your life.

EXACTLY.  Anyone who wishes to contact me with anything more than a takedown request will be told in no uncertain terms to FECK OFF.

Images are NOT worth anything and the whining crybabies (this goes out especially to you Mr POS Tom Schwabel) need to grow up and find and a legitimate job to do instead of funding all of your luxurious vacations on the backs of honest hardworking people.

Everyone is a "photographer" now and thinks that they too can make it rich by selling their precious photos.  About time these trolling pieces of human excrement are put in their place and told by a judge with some common sense that their precious work isn't worth what their overinflated egos tell them their work is worth.

I just can't get over how awesome it is this blew up in his face and I hope the little twit is bankrupted by this so the decision stands and starts to set precedent across the US courts.

AWESOME news!  Let the trolls suck it down and lose all control over their worthless garbage images.

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Email from
« on: June 25, 2018, 04:42:41 PM »
Maybe that argument is not legally correct.  But there are no damages to be awarded here that any sane person would ever award.  Especially to some talentless hack photographer who thinks their work is worth a million dollars like most of them who use Pixsy and the likes do, and who refused to agree to any sort of reasonable resolution to the problem.

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee followup
« on: June 18, 2018, 12:59:48 PM »
Judgment or no judgement, who cares.  A court is not a collection agent.  And for many of the awards I have seen, it won't be worth it to collect those amounts if the extortion target is unwilling to pay.

It's THEIR problem to figure out where my assets are.  And good luck with that.  Life goes on, no problem.

Oh, and the class would also include people who had been harassed for years and perhaps even had to pay for legal consultation before realizing the whole thing was a giant racket and scam.  The class isn't just people who actually caved and paid.

The point fed up and I are making is there are many trolls who are actually putting their copyrighted work online and intentionally labeling it as free to use.  In the case of Schwabel, he's put it onto completely free sites without any terms whatsoever.  Youngson seems to be a little different because of the attribution requirement.  But in both cases and I'm sure hundreds of others the trolls are seeding their work to ENCOURAGE infringement and then extorting a disproportionate amount of money from hundreds of victims.

The fact that they've made a business model from extorting settlements should be obvious.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
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.