Messages

31

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty Images Letter from a Web Designer's Perspective - Any Advice?

« on: March 27, 2013, 12:24:23 PM »

You can also search via google images, which is usually better than TinEye these days.
Enter "Getty" as a keyword to focus the results.

S.G.

32

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getting Getty's Claim Transferred to my company oppose to my client's

« on: March 27, 2013, 12:22:10 PM »

What you describe is a very common tactic that Getty uses.
Getty will put the squeeze on your client, thereby making you look "bad" in the eyes of a customer.

Having said that, Getty usually doesn't sue over a single image or anything.
But, they do bother alleged infringers over a long period of time before giving up.

S.G.

33

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Recieved Letter from getty

« on: March 26, 2013, 10:37:41 AM »

Jerry makes some good points.

Pond5's good!!
I like Fotolia's royalty-free offerings, also.  I'm not affiliated with them or anything, though.

S.G.

34

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Recieved Letter from getty

« on: March 25, 2013, 03:04:55 PM »

I recommend that people buy their images.
Royalty-free images are inexpensive, and the selection is very, very good these days.
The piece of mind is worth it.  They only cost 50 cents to about two dollars for web use.

Some images that are advertized as "free" have been planted by copyright trolls.
People use them freely, and then the trolls catch you and charge 1500 to 14,000 dollars per "infringement".

Avoid Getty images "iStock" photos, and Masterfile's "Crestock".  Those are troll companies.
Even if you've bought from them, if there's any future disagreement, they'll drive you nuts.

S.G.

35

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Recieved a demand letter today.. What do you think of my response?

« on: March 25, 2013, 12:18:20 AM »

Anyone else find it VERY interesting that Getty Images no longer provides the URL where they claim to have discovered alleged infringements?

I think that they're trying to fool the inexperienced into paying for infringements that they didn't commit.
It's pretty easy even for a novice to notice that an URL doesn't match their site, or that the URL is related to an ad-server.
In the absence of the URL, some people may be more likely to pay up when they're innocent.

Pretty sleazy if you ask me.

S.G.

36

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: OK...got a surprise letter

« on: March 25, 2013, 12:10:16 AM »

I guess that I'll be the "unpopular guy" today....

Getty images have never filed a lawsuit over a single image, so it's unlikely that anything would ever come of this.
But, they'll bug your friend/client for up to three years, though.  They'll use that as leverage to get either you or your client to pay.

S.G.

37

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Letter from photographer over Getty image

« on: March 24, 2013, 11:55:32 PM »

Yes, don't reply.  Something's strange about this one.

If a photographer sought compensation on their own, that would be a violation of their contract with Getty.
It's Getty's job to settle these matters.

Getty hardly ever owns the copyright to its images.
You mentioned that the photographer didn't register the copyright either.
So, neither of them (whether separately or together) could get more than the retail price of the image awarded in a lawsuit (in US law).

Note that Getty images have never filed a lawsuit over a single image, so it's unlikely that anything would ever come of this.

S.G.

38

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Canadian victims... here's an article of interest by the CIPPIC

« on: March 24, 2013, 11:46:02 PM »

Offhand, I'd say that it would governed by Croatian laws.

Ironically, Getty doesn't hold the copyrights to the images that comprise most of its collections.
If they are copyrighted at all, the copyrights are often held by the artist/photographers in botched bulk registrations.
Additionally, Getty's contracts with its artists were recently revealed to be in a state of shambles.

In any case, it's rather pointless to inquire as to whether or not they own the copyright.
They'll often call your bluff by saying that they don't have to send you proof unless it goes to court.

Getty images have never filed a lawsuit over a single image, so it's unlikely that anything would ever come of this.

S.G.

39

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Letter Received But No Such Image

« on: March 24, 2013, 11:36:26 PM »

It seems a bit odd to me that Getty Images didn't provide the URL to the image in question.

At this point, it's a bit irrelevant in my opinion.
Getty images have never filed a lawsuit over a single image, so it's unlikely that anything would ever come of this.

S.G.

40

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Got letter. Question about my response.

« on: March 24, 2013, 11:31:41 PM »

Getty images have never filed a lawsuit over a single image, so it's unlikely that anything would ever come of this.

The collection agency can't do anything, as this is NOT a debt.  Furthermore, they must stop contacting you if you tell them to do so.
With Getty Images, it's rather pointless to inquire as to whether or not they own the copyright.

They usually don't hold the actual copyrights, and will call your bluff by saying that they don't have to send you proof unless it goes to court.

Again, it's unlikely to ever come to anything.

S.G.

41

Legal Controversies Forum / Re: Owners of "Grumpy Cat" vow to sue infringers

« on: March 20, 2013, 12:49:12 AM »

I love Grumpy Cat.
I hope that they don't take this too far.

S.G.

42

Legal Controversies Forum / Owners of "Grumpy Cat" vow to sue infringers

« on: March 19, 2013, 11:40:44 PM »

Owners of "Grumpy Cat" vow to sue infringers

"The owners of feline internet sensation Grumpy Cat have applied for trademarks over a wide range of merchandise, such as cell phone covers, beer mugs and video games. The cat’s lawyer, however, says the owners will “try to be cool and stay righteous” about kitty-related fan art, and will only go after “dirtbags” who defiantly attempt to cash in..."

http://paidcontent.org/2013/03/14/grumpy-cat-shows-claws-vows-to-sue-infringers/

S.G.

43

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another tale of attempted extortion

« on: March 15, 2013, 12:38:11 AM »

Thanks for the details that you provided.  This is a classic "Masterfile" case.
The whole process is designed to make people panic, and to wear them down.

I'm still quite surprised that MF is still using NCS for leverage.  NCS can't do anything in a case like this.
They actually have to stop contacting you if state such.  If they don't, then they're breaking the law.

MF lowered the price rather quickly, and they did use NCS.  It seems as if your case isn't too serious to them.

S.G.

44

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Received a letter... No longer own the site

« on: March 12, 2013, 02:16:46 PM »

Getty doesn't have any track record of suing over one image.
So, you probably don't have to worry about that.

I would be simply factual in your correspondence.
Yes, if you're too defensive, some clerk/salesperson at Getty will think that you're scared, and come after you harder.
After you've explained the situation, just leave it at that.  They will send you letters from time to time, though.

I don't feel that they put much effort into investigating "innocence" or "guilt" in a small matter like this.
They chose you, and they'll bug you for money.

S.G.

45

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Masterfile seeks "damages" in Canada

« on: March 04, 2013, 02:53:03 PM »

Yeah... MF uses this "registered email" thing.  It's pretty much B.S.
There's no way for the email service to "verify" that anyone even got the mail.
But, it's irrelevant, since you responded to them.

MF is rather litigious.  They have sued over a single image.
But, that's rare.  They haven't been filing many lawsuits in Canada these days.

S.G.